secop_search_processes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden and fails it: nothing about whether scraping is a fallback or always-on, how costly spider_enrich_top_n is, pagination/limits, rate limits, or auth. The mentions of SoQL and 'Puente SCRAPPING' gesture at backend behavior but remain opaque jargon rather than actionable context.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It is efficient, though its brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined economy.

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?

For a 13-parameter tool with zero annotation coverage, one sentence is nowhere near sufficient. Even granting that an output schema exists and return values needn't be described, the agent gets no guidance on filter interactions, the dataset switch, or what spider enrichment does.

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% across 13 parameters, and the description only implicitly touches one of them by naming the two datasets ('procesos o contratos') that map to the dataset enum. Filters such as ciudad, estado, entidad, nit_entidad, unspsc_code, cuantia_min/max and especially spider_enrich_top_n get no explanation of format (e.g. NIT without check digit) or effect.

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?

Names a specific verb (busca) plus a concrete resource (procesos de contratación o contratos electrónicos) and the platform (SECOP II), so an agent knows the domain. It does not distinguish this from siblings like secop_spider_crawl or secop_inspect_opportunity, which plausibly also retrieve procurement records, leaving overlap unresolved.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this search versus spider_crawl or inspect_opportunity, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The parenthetical '(SODA SoQL + Puente SCRAPPING)' hints at two retrieval paths but doesn't tell the agent which conditions trigger which.

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