olx_ver_anuncio

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context by listing the returned content categories, but says nothing about auth, rate limits, or failure modes beyond what annotations and the output schema already convey.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then a routing sentence at the end. The field enumeration is long but each item earns its place by telling the agent what data it will get; no filler sentences.

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 an output schema present and rich annotations, the description needn't restate return format, and it covers purpose plus one routing case. Complete enough for a read-only detail tool, though sibling routing is only partial.

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 100%, so both parameters (anuncio as URL or list id, formato enum markdown/json) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, which is the correct baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb+resource ('Detalle completo de un anuncio') and enumerates exactly what the detail contains – payments, direct-from-owner status, contacts, address/CEP, advertiser profile, fraud risk. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from olx_analizar_riesgo, so an agent can separate it from siblings without opening schemas.

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?

It gives an explicit when-not and names the alternative: 'No compara con el mercado (usa olx_analizar_riesgo para eso)'. This routes the market-comparison case away, but it does not mention the other plausible siblings (olx_comparar_anuncios, olx_precios_mercado), so guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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