get_consolidation_states_table

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states a simple retrieval action without mentioning whether the operation is read-only, what the response contains, or if there are any side effects or prerequisites. This is a significant gap for a tool with no structured 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundancy. It is efficient and to the point, though it lacks any structural elaboration. The brevity is appropriate for a simple getter, but it borders on under-specification.

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 no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is the only context an agent has. It does not explain what 'consolidation states' are, why an agent would need them, or how the table relates to the law domain. This is insufficient for an agent to confidently select and invoke the tool, especially given the many sibling table tools.

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 input schema is empty. The baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, and the description does not need to elaborate on parameter details since none exist. It adds no parameter semantics, but none are required.

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 uses a specific verb ('Obtiene') and resource ('la tabla de estados de consolidación'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling table retrieval tools like get_scopes_table and get_departments_table. The resource name is explicit, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool fetches.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools such as get_scopes_table and get_matters_table exist, but the description does not differentiate usage scenarios or mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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