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 discloses the transformation (takes iterated definition, produces final artifact) and lists output components, but does not detail side effects, state changes, or dependencies beyond the input parameters.

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?

Two sentences: first defines purpose and deliverable, second gives usage condition. No redundancy, every word earns its place. Front-loaded with key information.

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 tool with no output schema, the description lists output components (identity, tools, etc.) but lacks explicit return structure or error conditions. However, given the parameter count (4) and clear usage context, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to decide when and how to invoke.

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 covers all 4 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description only vaguely references the core parameter ('toma la definición iterada') without adding new semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 clearly states it is the 'CIERRE' step that produces the final artifact after iterations, listing specific components (identity layer, tools, limits, etc.). It references a specific sibling (checklist_nacimiento) to indicate precondition, distinguishing it from other steps.

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?

Explicitly says 'Llamala cuando checklist_nacimiento dé APTO', providing a clear trigger. While it doesn't enumerate when NOT to use it, the precondition is well-defined and the context of being the closing step implies exclusivity.

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