Retrieve the contract defining repetition, isolation, and non-overwrite rules. Use it to ensure dossier simulations avoid duplicate execution and data overwriting.
Devuelve la política de repetición, aislamiento y no sobrescritura.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read of a policy but says nothing about permissions, side effects, whether the policy is mutable, or what 'repetición / aislamiento / no sobrescritura' actually govern at runtime.
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 efficient sentence with no filler, though being only one clause it is rather terse for a contract getter. Nothing is wasted but little is front-loaded beyond the verb.
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 zero-parameter getter with no output schema, the description gives the topic of the returned contract but not its structure or the conditions under which the policy applies. It is minimally adequate, not complete.
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 there is no schema semantics to miss; the baseline of 4 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?
States a specific verb ('Devuelve') and resource (the repetition/isolation/non-overwrite policy contract), so the agent knows this is a read-only contract fetch. It distinguishes itself from siblings only via the p8f3 tag, and the description never names the dossier context or the sibling 'obtener_contrato_p8f2_integridad_dossier' it sits beside.
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?
No indication of when to call this, what prerequisite phase (p8f3) must be reached, or how it relates to the sibling contract getters. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.