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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral context. It does disclose a payment/cost element ('pago x402 $0.05 USDC'), which is a useful behavioral trait. However, it does not describe the output format, side effects, or any requirements beyond the fee.

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 efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes the cost detail without any wasted words.

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?

Although the tool is simple, the description omits essential operational details: what the 'input' parameter should contain, what the output summary will look like, and how the payment is triggered. With no output schema, these details are needed for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the single 'input' parameter is undocumented by the schema. The description hints that the input is a document or article, but it does not clarify whether this should be raw text, a URL, a file path, or what language or format is expected.

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 verb ('Resumir') and resource ('documento o articulo'), making the tool's core purpose clear. It does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools, but the summarization action is reasonably distinct from translation, classification, and data analysis.

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 implies the tool should be used for summarizing documents or articles, but it gives no explicit guidance on when not to use it or what sibling tool might be a better alternative. The intended context is clear, but exclusions and alternatives are absent.

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