actuaciones

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose two meaningful traits: the operation is read-only ('lectura abierta') and requires no registration ('sin registro'). It stops short of describing return shape, pagination, or filtering behavior.

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 compact sentence with the resource front-loaded, examples parenthesized, and access mode appended. No wasted words, though the omission of any verb is a content gap rather than a conciseness win.

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 one-optional-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what the resource is and its access model, which is close to sufficient. It still omits the operation type and any note on the lang parameter, leaving minor gaps.

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 single parameter 'lang' is undocumented in both schema (0% coverage) and description. The enum values es/va are self-explanatory as Spanish/Valencian, but the description adds nothing about the parameter, leaving the low-coverage gap unaddressed.

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 the resource ('actuaciones en vía pública') and clarifies it with examples ('obras, podas'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like avisos or categories. However, it never states a verb – there is no indication whether the tool lists, retrieves, or searches these public-works entries, leaving the agent to infer the operation.

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?

'Lectura abierta, sin registro' communicates a precondition (no authentication needed) but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any filtering or scenario context. The agent gets an access hint, not a usage rule.

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