Inversiones de Fondos Mutuos

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the period parameter context but doesn't disclose behavior beyond that (e.g., filtering, default tipo). 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?

Single sentence, no superfluous words, but it is a noun phrase without a verb. It is concise, not efficient in conveying 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?

With 4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no usage guidance, the description is insufficient for correct invocation. Output schema exists, but the description doesn't clarify parameter semantics, especially the 'consulta' switch, making the tool hard to use correctly.

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 descriptions cover 0% of parameters. The description mentions 'nacionales o extranjeros,' which aligns with the 'tipo' enum, but fails to explain 'mes,' 'anio,' or 'consulta' options (fondos/emisores/pais_transaccion). An agent would not know how to construct a correct 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 identifies the resource ('inversiones de fondos mutuos') and scope ('instrumentos nacionales o extranjeros por período'), but lacks an explicit action verb like 'consultar' or 'obtener.' It partially differentiates from sibling mutual fund tools by focusing on investments, but doesn't explicitly distinguish from cartera/cartola.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives; no exclusions or prerequisites. The only usage hint is 'por período,' implying time-period filtering, but no context about suitable scenarios.

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