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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds the qualifiers 'proximo' and 'publicado', giving temporal and status context. However, it does not disclose return format, behavior when no event exists, or whether 'proximo' means upcoming by date or most recently published.

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 directly states the action and object. It contains no filler, redundant information, or unnecessary detail, making it optimally front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter, read-only tool with rich annotations, the description captures the core semantics: it returns the next published VITUR event. It is not a perfect 5 because there is no output schema and the description does not mention return shape or edge-case behavior when no event is found.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema already provides complete coverage. The description has no need to explain parameter syntax or meaning, and the baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4.

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 uses the specific verb 'Devuelve' and identifies the exact resource: 'el proximo evento VITUR publicado'. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools such as vitur-proximos-eventos by using the singular 'evento' rather than plural, indicating a single next event.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like vitur-proximos-eventos or vitur-agenda-evento. It does not state any exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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