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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the returned data shape (price, sale status, URL, included events) but says nothing about auth requirements, whether results are cached/static, or what happens if no pass is currently on sale.

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 front-loaded sentence with the resource first and the return fields after; no filler, no redundancy with 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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing the return value, and it does list the main fields an agent would need. It stops short of indicating whether the included-events list is bounded or how to interpret sale status values.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies; there is no parameter behavior left unexplained. The description correctly implies a global, unfiltered lookup.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Devuelve el pase vigente") and enumerates the payload: price, sale status, official URL, included events. It does not, however, distinguish itself from sibling tools that also return purchase/informational data (vitur-entradas-evento, vitur-informacion-vitur), so the agent must infer whether this is a ticket-product lookup or general info.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use statement and no named alternative. The word "vigente" weakly implies current-only data (no historical passes), but nothing tells the agent when to prefer this over vitur-entradas-evento or vitur-informacion-vitur.

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