leychile_obtener_fragmento

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds 'forensic precision' and return format context but no additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations convey. No contradiction.

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 long, front-loaded with the main action, and includes a helpful example. Every sentence is purposeful with no waste.

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 explains what is returned ('solo el fragmento pedido con su cita') and with an output schema present, additional info on return values is not needed. It covers key aspects for a tool with few required parameters and clear purpose.

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?

The input schema has detailed descriptions for each parameter, so schema_description_coverage is effectively high. The tool description does not repeat parameter details but provides examples that illustrate usage. This adds value beyond schema but not significantly more than the baseline.

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 uses a specific verb 'Extrae' and resource 'inciso, numeral o letra de un artículo', clearly stating what the tool extracts. The examples further clarify the purpose. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'leychile_obtener_articulo' which returns the whole article.

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 provides clear context and examples of usage, indicating when to extract specific subparts. However, it does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the examples make the context clear.

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