list_puntos_de_venta

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It correctly indicates a read-only operation and mentions the scope (authenticated CUIT) and output focus (enabled for e-invoicing). It does not discuss rate limits or detailed response format, but it is sufficient for a simple listing tool.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the primary action and resource, then adds qualifying detail about the authenticated user and enabled status.

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 tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains its purpose and what it shows. It does not mention pagination or ordering, but given the simplicity, the description is mostly complete.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter meaning. Schema coverage is 100% (no parameters). The description provides enough context without repeating schema.

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 the verb 'List', the resource 'points of sale', and the context 'for the authenticated CUIT'. It also specifies what information is shown ('enabled for electronic invoicing'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'emit_invoice' or 'list_credentials'.

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 when to use the tool: to retrieve available points of sale for the current user. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives, but the purpose is straightforward and no sibling tool serves the same function.

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