Buscar en varias fuentes a la vez

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses parallel searching, source attribution per result, profile-driven source expansion, and the caveat that SUIN validity is labeled per the search engine and is not official. It does not explicitly state read-only behavior, but 'busca' and 'agrega' strongly imply a non-mutating search operation.

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 reasonably compact and front-loaded with the core action, but it packs multiple conditional clauses and caveats into a few long sentences. It remains readable and scannable without being overly verbose.

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 description explains the result shape (source + link + source declaration) and the SUIN validity caveat, which is important given no output schema is present. It does not detail error behavior, pagination, or exact response structure, but for a multi-source search tool the provided context is largely sufficient.

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 schema already provides complete coverage for all four parameters, and the description adds useful semantic context for 'perfil' and 'fuentes', such as tributario → DIAN and salud → INVIMA/Supersalud. No parameter is left unexplained.

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?

Clearly states that the tool searches multiple named legal sources in parallel and aggregates results with source and link. It also distinguishes itself from exact-citation and court-specific tools, making its purpose unmistakable.

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?

Explicitly says to use it when the query is open-ended or subject-based and no more specific tool is obvious, and tells the user to prefer resolver_cita for exact citations or a dedicated court search for a specific tribunal. This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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