suggest_categories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does not say whether results are ranked by confidence, how many codes are returned, or what happens when the optional 'hint' is omitted. Only the operation itself is disclosed.

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 carrying verb, resource, and an illustrative example with zero filler. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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-parameter, no-output-schema tool this is close to sufficient, but the description omits the return shape (list of codes? ranked matches?) and the meaning of an absent hint, both of which an agent would need before invoking.

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?

One parameter ('hint') with 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. The parenthetical example does convey that 'hint' is free-text keyword input, but nothing is said about length, format, or whether multiple words/phrases are accepted.

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 ('sugiere') and a specific resource ('códigos TCOM-xxx'), plus an input example. An agent can tell this is a fuzzy code-suggestion tool rather than a plain lookup, though it never explicitly distinguishes itself from list_categories or get_category.

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?

No when-to-use, no when-not-to-use, and no mention of the obvious alternatives list_categories / get_category. The example hint ('contenedor desbordado') implies the input form but gives no guidance on which tool to pick.

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