Estructura de Respuesta JSON (API Mercado Público)

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It transparently states the tool only returns structural information, not actual data. There are no side effects or authorization notes, but for a read-only metadata tool this is adequate.

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 sentence with no extraneous words. The verb 'Devuelve' is front-loaded, immediately indicating the action. Every word 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?

Given the single parameter, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description fully covers what the tool does. It explicitly states the return type (JSON anatomy) and scope (fields, types, nesting).

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 coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'entidad' described as 'Entidad para la cual deseas conocer su estructura de respuesta JSON.' The description adds no additional parameter details beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Devuelve') and resource ('anatomía del JSON de respuesta'), clearly stating it returns the JSON structure (fields, types, nesting) for a given entity. The phrase 'única y exclusivamente' distinguishes it from data-fetching tools like obtener_licitacion.

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 implies use when needing to understand the response format of a specific entity. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the focus on 'solo estructura' and sibling tool names (e.g., obtener_licitacion) provide implicit guidance.

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