obtener_contrato_arranque_motores

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Devuelve' implies a read operation, but there is no information about side effects, permissions, response format, or any other trait beyond the implicit read-only nature.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized, though its terseness contributes to the overall lack of context.

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 contract-retrieval tool with no output schema, the description should explain what a 'contrato' contains or how the returned profiles and sequences are meant to be used. Instead, it merely names the return content, leaving the agent without enough context to understand the tool's role in the broader motor-starting workflow.

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, so the baseline is 4 per the rules. The description adds no parameter meaning because none exist, and the empty schema leaves nothing further to clarify.

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 ('Devuelve') and resource ('contratos de arranque estático, perfiles y secuencias P13'), which is more than a tautology. It implicitly distinguishes itself from the dynamic motor contract sibling by naming 'arranque estático', but does not explicitly differentiate from the many other contract-returning siblings.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as obtener_contrato_dinamica_motores, validar_arranque_motores, or ejecutar_arranque_motores. There is no mention of prerequisites, workflow position, or exclusions.

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