Buscar Licitaciones por Rango de Fechas

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that each day consumes a request from the daily quota (10,000 requests/ticket) and recommends large ranges be run at night. It also states it queries per day and consolidates results. This is good transparency for rate limiting and performance, though it lacks details on error handling or output pagination.

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 concise: two sentences plus an important note. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by behavior and a usage tip. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or waste.

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?

Given the tool has no output schema and 6 parameters (2 required), the description covers the core behavior and rate limit implications. However, it does not describe the output format or provide examples, leaving some ambiguity about what the returned list contains. For a consolidation tool, this is a notable gap.

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 parameter formats and requirements. The description adds some contextual value by mentioning the 30-day max and per-day request consumption, but does not significantly enhance understanding of individual parameters beyond 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 title and description clearly state it searches for licitaciones by date range with a max of 30 days. It distinguishes from siblings like 'buscar_licitaciones' (a different search) and 'obtener_licitacion' (single tender), and the description explains it queries per day and consolidates results.

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?

The description specifies it is useful for historical analysis or reports of specific periods. It includes a note recommending nighttime usage for large ranges due to daily request quota, which provides context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like 'buscar_licitaciones'.

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