set_identity

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It discloses the validation rule (at least one of phone or email) and that the identity is persisted after a one-time prompt, but omits key mutation traits such as authentication requirements, overwrite behavior, error responses, and return values.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste: the purpose is front-loaded, followed by the usage note and validation rule. Every clause earns 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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and validation but leaves behavioral gaps (auth, side effects, return behavior). The schema handles parameters well, but the description should do more to compensate for the lack of annotations.

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 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description restates the cross-field constraint ('al menos uno'), which is also implied by the individual schema descriptions, adding only marginal clarification beyond the structured data.

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?

States a specific verb ('Guarda') and resource ('identidad del comunicante'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling get_identity. An agent can tell it is a write operation that persists identity without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly says it is asked ONCE after installation and then reused, giving a clear when-to-call condition. Does not mention an alternative tool or when to avoid calling, but the main usage context is provided.

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