Buscador de tasas bancarias

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the data source (SBIF servlet) but no behavioral details such as pagination, filtering, or response format. With annotations covering the safety profile, this is acceptable but not informative.

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 a single, clear sentence that immediately communicates the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words or redundancy.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description is adequately complete. The only minor gap is the inconsistency between 'bancos' in the name and 'instituciones financieras' in the description, which could be clarified.

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 schema fully describes the single parameter 'indice' with a default value and description. The tool description adds no extra meaning about the parameter, but schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Buscador de tasas de interés de instituciones financieras' which clearly identifies the action (search) and resource (interest rates). It also mentions the SBIF InfoFinanciera servlet, adding specificity that distinguishes it from other bank-related tools like cmf_bancos_cronologia.

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 implies its use for finding interest rates of financial institutions but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over alternative tools like cmf_bancos_reportes or cmf_indicadores_financieros_sa. It lacks exclusions or alternative names.

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