ajustar_por_udis

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about whether this is a pure calculation or a mutation ('Actualiza' is ambiguous), what the result represents, or any rate-source behavior. Only the date-range scoping is implied.

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?

Very short and front-loaded, which is good, but the trailing English tagline 'UDIS adjustment' merely restates the Spanish and earns no place. Efficient size is offset by that dead sentence.

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 3-param tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should convey what comes back (an adjusted amount) and the date conventions. Neither is present, leaving key agent questions unanswered.

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 0% and the description only weakly maps to the params: 'renta/deuda/sueldo' hints at monto and 'entre fechas' hints at fecha_ini/fecha_fin, but no date format (ISO? DD/MM/YYYY?) or units are given. This matters for a date-driven financial calculation tool.

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?

States a clear verb (Actualiza/ajusta) and the target resource (renta/deuda/sueldo), scoped 'por UDIS entre fechas'. An agent can distinguish it from pure conversion siblings like convertir_udis_a_pesos, though the description never names the distinction explicitly.

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 when-to-use guidance, no conditions, and no reference to alternatives such as convertir_udis_a_pesos or get_udis_hoy despite the crowded sibling set of UDIS/currency tools. The agent must infer when adjustment is preferred over plain conversion.

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