get_weekly_summary

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

With no annotations provided, the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, required date format boundaries, what the summary contains, or error behavior. The description essentially only restates the tool's function without adding operational context.

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?

A single, clear sentence conveys the core purpose without redundancy. It is front-loaded and free of unnecessary wording.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (2 params, no output schema), the description is minimal but sufficient for basic invocation. However, it lacks context about what makes this weekly summary distinct from sibling summary tools, and it does not clarify the expected output format or edge cases, so completeness is limited.

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 coverage is 100%, and both parameters already have meaningful descriptions in the schema. The description adds no extra semantic weight beyond what the input schema provides, so the baseline of 3 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 uses a clear verb ('Obtiene') and resource ('resumen semanal de publicaciones del BOE'), making the core purpose evident. However, it does not differentiate from closely named siblings like 'get_boe_summary' or 'get_boe_summary_range', so some ambiguity remains.

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. There are no context cues, exclusions, or mentions of related sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer the use case from the name alone.

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