Estadísticas de Rentas Vitalicias

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds context about data being 'por compañía' and the types of statistics, but does not disclose behavior like pagination or output format. This matches the expected baseline with annotations present.

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 with a parenthetical list, front-loaded with the key term 'Estadísticas'. No wasted words.

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 a rich schema (100% param descriptions), output schema, and annotations. The description adequately explains what the tool returns and at what granularity. It could mention that 'codigo' is required or that limit/offset control pagination, but those are already in the schema, so the description is sufficiently complete.

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 all parameters (100%), so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the domain of the 'codigo' parameter (commissions, premiums, interest rates, rankings) and indicating company-level breakdown, which helps map the example codes to real meanings.

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 specifies the resource ('mercado de rentas vitalicias previsionales por compañía') and enumerates content ('comisiones, primas, tasas de interés, rankings de asesores'), which distinguishes it from sibling seguros tools. However, it lacks a direct verb like 'obtener' or 'consultar', making it slightly less action-oriented than ideal.

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 implies usage: use this tool when you need statistics about rentas vitalicias. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusions, so guidance is only implicit.

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