Listar entidades por tipo

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only minor context: it mentions the CMF listing engine and implies a limitation (not the full catalog), but does not disclose pagination behavior, rate limits, or authentication requirements. Given the annotations, this is acceptable but not rich.

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 two concise sentences. The first states the core function and parameters, and the second provides an alternative. It is front-loaded and contains no fluff or redundancy.

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 description is largely complete for a simple filtered-list tool: it clarifies purpose, gives an alternative, and output schema exists. The only notable gap is that the 'mercado' enum values (V, O, S) are undocumented, which could leave the agent unsure of valid inputs.

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 80% (4 of 5 parameters). The description repeats the tipoentidad example already present in the schema ('RVEMI=emisores de valores') and mentions 'mercado' without explaining its enum values, so it adds little beyond the structured schema.

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 the tool lists supervised entities by type and market, using the specific verb 'Lista' and resource 'entidades supervisadas'. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling cmf_buscar_entidad by explicitly directing the user there for the complete catalog, making its own scope unambiguous.

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 provides an explicit alternative: 'Para el catálogo completo use cmf_buscar_entidad con consulta='%'`. This tells the agent when not to use this tool and what to use instead, while implying that this tool is for filtered listing by type/market.

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