catastro_en_radio

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation is local and offline ('Local, sin red'), which is useful, but it does not state whether the operation is read-only, what the response format will be, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a tool with no 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 extremely concise with no filler. It front-loads the core function and key parameter details in a single sentence, making every word earn its place.

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 simple query tool, the description provides minimal information. It does not explain what the response will look like, whether it returns a list of parcels, or any prerequisites. Given no annotations and no output schema, this lack of detail makes the tool under-specified.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explicitly indicates that x and y are in EPSG:25829 and radio is in meters, adding crucial meaning to the bare schema properties. It does not explain the optional srs parameter, but the default is provided in the 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 returns parcels whose centroid falls within a circle, specifying coordinate system (EPSG:25829) and units (meters) for the inputs. While it lacks an explicit verb like 'returns' or 'searches', the intent is unambiguous and distinguishes it from siblings like catastro_por_coordenada.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'Local, sin red' provides some context about offline capability but does not mention exclusions or when to prefer this over sibling tools like catastro_vecinas or catastro_por_coordenada.

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