Estado del índice y las fuentes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the key behavioral fact not in annotations: the local index may be incomplete and this tool reveals coverage limits, which explains otherwise-confusing empty results.

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 short sentences: the first states what it returns, the second states when to call it. No filler, and the capability is front-loaded before the usage conditions.

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, rich annotations, and no inputs, nothing an agent needs in order to call this correctly is missing. The one caveat an agent must know — that results may be empty because of index gaps — is stated.

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?

Zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description correctly implies a single global status report rather than a per-source or per-date query.

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: reports how far the local index reaches and whether there are gaps. That diagnostic role is obviously distinct from every sibling (search_convocatorias, get_convocatoria, deadlines_soon, etc.), though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Gives two concrete triggers: a search that returns nothing where you must distinguish 'no matching items' from 'the index lacks those dates', and user questions about data freshness. This directly routes the agent away from re-running search_convocatorias and toward this tool.

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