Sanciones globales por mercado

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds the market categories and date-range scope, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as pagination, limits, or required authorizations. No contradiction with 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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the core purpose. It avoids unnecessary words, though it is somewhat telegraphic and could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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 4 parameters with no schema descriptions and no guidance, the description is too thin. It omits any mention of the 'tipoentidad' parameter, provides no usage context, and relies entirely on the output schema to fill gaps. The tool is likely a simple read, but the missing parameter documentation makes it incomplete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies 'desde/hasta' as a date range and explains the mercado enum values (V=valores, O=otros, S=seguros), but it does not mention 'tipoentidad' at all, leaving that parameter unexplained.

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 provides sanctions for an entire market (V/O/S) within a date range, implying a listing/query operation. It distinguishes from sibling tools by emphasizing 'todo un mercado' versus company-specific sanctions, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 no when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or mention of alternative tools like cmf_empresa_sanciones or cmf_sanciones_cursadas. The market and date range are implied but not framed as selection criteria.

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