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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the tool gets a list and optionally filters, which largely repeats the schema; it does not disclose output shape, ordering, pagination, behavior when no matches occur, or whether the operation is read-only.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then adds the optional filter and use case. Every clause contributes meaningful information without unnecessary detail.

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 low-complexity tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides the essential details: what is returned and when it is useful. It is adequate, though it could be slightly richer by mentioning the relationship to sibling tools or the exact structure of the returned list.

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 100%; the input schema already documents 'municipio' with an example. The description's 'opcionalmente filtrados por municipio' adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Obtiene la lista de barrios/zonas disponibles', clearly indicating it returns location neighborhoods. It also mentions the optional 'municipio' filter, which differentiates it from sibling tools like listar_municipios and listar_propiedades.

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 phrase 'Útil para búsquedas más específicas de ubicación' gives a clear use case for more specific location searches, implying when it should be used. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., when to use listar_municipios instead), so guidance is only implied.

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