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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It implies a read-only listing and reveals possible status values, but does not state auth/permission needs, pagination behavior, or that no side effects occur.

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?

Single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Efficient and appropriately sized for the tool's low complexity.

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?

The purpose and status values are clear for this low-complexity list tool. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description leaves return fields beyond status and pagination behavior unaddressed, creating minor gaps.

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%, so the optional 'pagina' parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter details beyond the status enumeration, which is output-related, so the baseline 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?

Explicit verb 'Lista' and resource 'documentos del equipo', with enumerated status values. It distinguishes itself from siblings like listar_plantillas and obtener_documento by its plural team-document scope, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or explicit alternatives are provided. Usage is only implied by the verb and resource combination.

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