Comunicaciones de emisores

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

The description adds no behavioral details beyond the annotations. It doesn't mention pagination behavior, output format (though output schema exists), or any limitations. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

One concise sentence that names the resource and lists key fields. 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 tool is simple (2 optional params, output schema present), and the description gives the core subject. However, it does not explicitly state that this is a paginated list of all issuer communications, which could lead to ambiguity.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the schema (limit and offset with descriptions and defaults), so the description need not add param semantics. Coverage is 100%, yielding the baseline 3.

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 is a noun phrase ('Comunicaciones de los emisores de valores') with a field list, but lacks an explicit verb like 'list' or 'get'. It identifies the resource but does not clearly state the operation, making it somewhat vague.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives; there is no mention of filtering, scope, or exclusions.

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