exportar_reporte_desde_archivo_p7c

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says a file is loaded and an HTML report generated, but says nothing about overwriting an existing ruta_salida, what happens if the snapshot is missing or malformed, or any permission requirements for a file-writing export operation.

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 well-formed sentence with no filler, front-loading the input and the produced artifact. It is appropriately sized, though its brevity is partly under-specification rather than economy.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, the description is too thin for a file-in/file-out export tool. It omits output format details, overwrite behavior, and the distinction from the sibling that produces the same report.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It hints that ruta_snapshot points to a P7A JSON file, but never explains ruta_salida, its default filename (mcp_electrico_report.html), or the expected path/format of either parameter.

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 ('genera') and resource ('reporte técnico P7C') and names the input ('snapshot P7A JSON'), so the action is unambiguous. However, 'el mismo reporte' is a dangling reference — it never names the sibling (likely exportar_reporte_tecnico_p7c) it is 'the same as', so differentiation relies on the tool name rather than the description.

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 using this when you have a P7A snapshot file, but gives no explicit when-to-use versus the many siblings, notably exportar_reporte_tecnico_p7c which apparently produces the same report from another source. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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