boe_sumario

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the date format, the two bulletin sources, the section-code filter, the title-text filter, and the Sunday/holiday emptiness caveat — useful behavioral context. It is silent on result shape and on the effect of max_items (default 200), which matters for a listing tool with no output schema.

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 dense clauses front-load the operación (which bulletin, which day) before the filter and caveat details. Every sentence carries information; the only omission is the untied max_items, not wasted words.

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 5-parameter listing tool with no annotations and no output schema, it covers sources, filters, and the empty-day case well. It leaves an agent guessing about the max_items default behavior and the structure of the returned 'disposiciones', which is a meaningful gap when no output schema exists.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does for 4 of 5 parameters: it explains fecha's 'AAAA-MM-DD' format, diario's boe/borme values, the valid sección codes (1, 2A, 2B, 3, 4, 5A), and texto's title-matching semantics. Only max_items 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?

The description names a specific resource ('Disposiciones de un día') and its two possible sources (BOE via diario=boe, BORME via diario=borme), so an agent knows exactly what it retrieves. Siblings are unrelated datasets, so explicit differentiation is unnecessary, but the verb (list/retrieve) is only implied rather than stated.

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?

It provides one genuine usage constraint — 'Domingos y festivos no hay boletín' — which tells the agent when a call will return nothing, plus the allowed diario and sección values. However, it never states when to prefer this over alternatives (e.g. a search tool) or what to do for holiday dates.

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