Buscar Biblioteca

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. 'Search' implies a read-only operation, but the description says nothing about result caps, pagination, matching semantics (substring vs. exact), or auth/permission needs. An output schema exists, which covers return shape, but other behavioral traits remain undisclosed.

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?

Two short sentences with the purpose front-loaded and the parameter hint attached directly to it; there is no filler. The only structural weakness is that the cryptic enum values are stated without decoding.

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, return values need not be described, but the description still leaves the core concept ('organized capture library'), the meaning of the 'tipo' values, and the relationship to categorias_biblioteca undefined. For a search tool this is not enough for reliable invocation.

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% and the schema declares no enum for 'tipo', so the description does add value by enumerating the accepted values ('nam', 'ir', 'all'). However, it never explains what those abbreviations mean, and 'texto' is left entirely unexplained, so the compensation for the coverage gap is only partial.

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 gives a verb and a resource ('Search the organized capture library'), so the basic action is identifiable. However, 'organized capture library' is an undefined concept in this tool set, and nothing distinguishes this from the sibling categorias_biblioteca, which presumably also relates to the library.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisite or scoping conditions, and no mention of the other library/preset tools in the sibling list. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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