Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so safety and repeatability are covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the default 7-day window, the hard 30-day cap, and the guaranteed sort order by closing date and time, which the annotations cannot express.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single sentence that front-loads the resource and scope, then the geography, then the ordering. Every clause carries information; there is no filler or restatement of the title.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only, parameter-light listing tool with no output schema, the definition covers the essentials an agent needs to call it: window semantics, geographic scope, and result ordering. The only real gap is the undocumented 'limite' parameter, which affects how many results come back.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 33%, so the description must compensate. It does explain 'dias' (7 default, up to 30) and 'provincia' (province or all Spain), but the 'limite' parameter is never mentioned in either the schema or the description, leaving one of three parameters opaque.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific resource and scope: home auctions closing within the next N days, in a province or across Spain, sorted by closing time. This clearly separates it from siblings like buscar_viviendas (general search) or ficha_vivienda (single listing), though it never names those siblings explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The 'closing soon' framing implies when to use it (deadline-driven queries), and the province/Spain scope hints at the geographic choice, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no routing to alternatives such as buscar_viviendas for non-deadline searches.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.