Convertir documento PDF de la CMF a Markdown

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint=true annotation, the description discloses that the conversion uses pdf-inspector, does not perform OCR, and indicates when a PDF is scanned. This adds useful behavioral context about limitations without contradicting the 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?

The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and each sentence adds value: what it does, input methods, and the scanned-PDF limitation. No superfluous information.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (multiple input modes, conversion behavior) and the presence of annotations and an output schema, the description covers the core functionality and key limitation (no OCR). It doesn't detail error handling, but the output schema likely provides return format, so this is sufficient.

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 the schema already explains all four parameters. The description only repeats the token/URL alternatives without adding new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score 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 clearly states it downloads a signed CMF document and converts it to readable Markdown for the agent. It specifies the document types (EEFF, hechos, sanciones, resoluciones, normas) and how it differs from sibling tools like cmf_documento_descargar by focusing on conversion to Markdown.

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 explains the tool accepts either a s567 token or a CMF URL, and notes the no-OCR limitation for scanned PDFs. While it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools, it implies when to use this tool (when readable Markdown is needed) as opposed to simple download or info tools.

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