crear_invitacion

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses important behavior: if text parameters are omitted, generic templates are used. It also clarifies that the agent is expected to author the invitation texts rather than simply passing through user content. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint flags.

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 two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the main purpose and then gives a concrete operational instruction with a clear fallback. Every clause adds useful information.

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 covers the core action and fallback behavior, but with nine parameters and no output schema, it could say more about what happens after creation, how to obtain event details, and whether duplicate invitations are possible. It is adequate for a first call but leaves some operational context implicit.

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 partially compensates by explaining that text parameters are optional and fall back to generic templates. However, it does not clarify individual parameters such as tema, codigo_vestimenta, linea_anfitrion, or mensaje_cierre, leaving per-parameter semantics mostly to the schema titles.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Crea la invitación digital de un evento.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools such as ver_invitacion, editar_invitacion, and activar_invitacion, and adds the expectation that the agent should write the invitation texts.

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?

The description gives clear context for when to use the tool: to create an event's digital invitation. It also instructs the agent to write the texts using the event information and the user's requested tone, with a fallback to generic templates. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the intended use is evident.

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