Recuperar snapshot del portal nacional de cortes (energia-ecuador.com, 2024)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds a genuinely useful behavioral caveat, that this is a frozen 2024-04-24 snapshot with only EEQ's Pichincha rotation surviving, which warns the agent about data coverage limits. No auth or rate-limit details, so 3 is appropriate.

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, well-front-loaded sentence that leads with what it is (Wayback snapshot of a specific portal) before narrowing to scope. No wasted words, though it lacks any routing or usage clause.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained here. The description conveys the resource and its data limitation, but an agent still has no guidance on when to select this tool over the live outage-schedule siblings, leaving a completeness gap.

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%, so both the query (matched against canton or sectores) and the format enum are already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or format detail for either parameter, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 specific resource and what it is: a Wayback Machine snapshot of the energia-ecuador.com portal, with a date and the surviving data scope. An agent understands what this returns. However, it does not distinguish itself from closely related siblings like search_cortes or get_cortes_horarios, which also concern outage schedules.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no named alternative. The description scopes the data ('only EEQ's Pichincha rotation survived'), which implicitly tells the agent the dataset is narrow, but it never says when to prefer this snapshot over the live search_cortes / get_cortes_horarios tools.

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