obtener_configuracion_unifilar

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. 'Devuelve' implies a read, and 'circuito activo' implies a stateful precondition, but the description never states what happens if no circuit is active, whether the result is cached, or what the returned metadata structure contains.

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 with no filler or repetition. It is appropriately sized for a zero-argument getter, though its brevity contributes to the gaps in other dimensions rather than being a virtue on its own.

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 no parameter schema to lean on, the description is the only source of information about this tool's contract, and it explains neither the return shape nor the stateful 'circuito activo' precondition. For a metadata getter whose entire value is the payload it returns, this leaves the agent under-informed.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, which is the baseline-4 case under the rubric. There is nothing for the description to disambiguate, and it correctly does not invent parameters.

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?

It states a verb (Devuelve) and a resource (metadatos de representación visual del circuito activo), so the broad intent is recoverable. However, 'metadatos de representación visual' is ambiguous about what is actually returned, and it overlaps heavily with the name 'obtener_configuracion_unifilar' and with siblings like generar_diagrama_unifilar and listar_elementos, with no differentiation. That lands between vague and clear.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus generar_diagrama_unifilar, listar_elementos, or any of the many other obtener_* getters. The only implicit context is 'circuito activo', which hints at a prerequisite but states no condition or alternative.

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