Índices de liquidez/solvencia de intermediarios

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as date filtering, pagination, or output format. It neither contradicts the annotations nor enriches them, offering no extra transparency 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 short sentence with no filler or redundant content. It front-loads the core topic and is easy to parse. While short, it is concise rather than verbose.

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 has 3 optional parameters, an output schema, and many sibling tools. The description is extremely minimal and does not specify valid date ranges, how to identify intermediaries, or what the resulting indices contain. Despite having structured annotations and output schema, the description leaves critical gaps for correct invocation.

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 are completely absent (0% coverage). The description also fails to explain any of the three parameters (desde, hasta, intermediario), leaving their meaning and usage entirely to inference from parameter names. The description does not compensate for the schema gap.

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 'Índices de liquidez y solvencia de intermediarios de valores' clearly identifies the resource (securities intermediaries) and the metric type (liquidity/solvency), but it is a noun phrase without an explicit action verb. It also does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like cmf_intermediarios_indicadores_ifrs, which likely covers similar indicators.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it state any prerequisites or contextual scenarios. This leaves the agent without direction on tool selection.

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