Cuadro de costos de FM (TAC)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safe read-only nature is clear. The description adds content details (types of costs) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as filtering behavior, series selection, or any output limitations beyond what the annotations provide.

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, focused sentence that packs meaningful detail about the tool's content without extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the primary noun and immediately specifies the output components.

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 a simple read-only query with an output schema, and the description covers the domain. However, the missing parameter semantics and the lack of usage context mean the description is not fully complete for an agent to confidently invoke it without additional schema or examples.

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 description does not explain the three parameters (mes, anio, admin). Even though the schema includes patterns for month and year, the description fails to clarify their semantics or how 'por serie' relates to the admin parameter, leaving an agent without enough information to construct a valid query.

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 that this tool provides a statistical table of mutual fund costs, specifying the exact components (remuneración fija/variable, gastos de operación, and TAC) and the grouping by series. This distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on portfolios, commissions, or investments.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only defines the output, without mentioning exclusions or the specific conditions under which this cost table is the appropriate choice compared to sibling mutual fund tools.

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