enaho_estado_cache

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavior context: it returns a year breakdown, disk space, and derived datasets, and notes that the short names are accepted by other tools (enaho_perfil, enaho_estimar, enaho_exportar). No contradiction with annotations.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-sentence purpose statement followed by a practical usage tip. Every sentence contributes value—it explains what the tool returns and why to use it—without any fluff or redundancy.

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 read-only cache status tool with no parameters and an output schema, the description fully covers the return content (year breakdown, disk space, derived datasets) and the real-world use case (avoiding unnecessary large downloads). The tool's role in the ecosystem is clear.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty properties). The description doesn't need to add parameter info. Baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, and the description focuses on the output rather than parameters, which is appropriate.

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 immediately states 'Que hay descargado, cuanto ocupa y que datasets derivados existen' — a specific verb+resource+scope. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like enaho_descargar (download) and enaho_listar_modulos (list modules) by focusing on cache status rather than downloads or listings.

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 explicitly instructs when to use: 'Consultala antes de descargar en masa' and explains why (the full ENAHO is several GB, and modules may already be cached). It does not explicitly mention when-not-to-use or name alternatives, but the strong contextual guidance earns a 4.

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