Leer una convocatoria

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

Goes well past the readOnly/idempotent annotations by disclosing caching behavior ("la primera vez descarga el texto del boletín y lo guarda, así que la siguiente llamada es instantánea") and the cost/politeness implication of hitting a public source. It also warns that requirements are in legal prose and must be read rather than inferred.

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?

Front-loaded with the core behavior, then usage, then caching, then the arg format. The summarizing/eligibility block is somewhat long, but it is high-stakes guidance rather than filler; a slightly tighter phrasing would earn a 5.

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 an output schema present, the description needn't describe return structure, and it covers everything else: what to call it for, the id format, caching cost, and a hard boundary on drawing eligibility conclusions. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the parameter, and it does: id is the "id" field of a search_convocatorias result, with the concrete format "boe:BOE-A-2026-21635". That is exactly the missing information an agent needs to construct a valid call.

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 una convocatoria con su TEXTO OFICIAL COMPLETO") and immediately separates it from the sibling search_convocatorias, which only finds candidates. An agent knows this is the read-the-full-text step, not a search.

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?

Explicit trigger ("cuando una convocatoria de search_convocatorias parezca encajar y haga falta leer sus requisitos") plus an explicit restraint ("Pídelo solo de las convocatorias que de verdad interesen... descargarlas todas sería abusar de una fuente pública"). It even lists what to look for: plazos, titulación, renta, méritos, baremos.

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