obtener_matriz_validacion

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. "Devuelve" implies a read, but nothing is said about whether it requires a configured workspace, whether it fails on an unconfigured project, what the matrix contains, or how "declarada" maturity differs from evaluated maturity elsewhere in the toolset.

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 focused sentence with the return subject front-loaded and no padding. It is tight, though the brevity here comes at the cost of information rather than being pure efficiency.

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-param read tool with no output schema, the description is the only source of meaning for what the returned 'matriz de madurez' actually contains and how it relates to the sibling evaluar_*/obtener_* tools. Neither is addressed, leaving the agent unable to predict the response shape or know when this tool is the right choice.

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 per the rubric the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Schema coverage is trivially 100%.

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?

"Devuelve la madurez técnica declarada de cada módulo" names a verb (Devuelve) and a resource (madurez técnica por módulo), so the basic action is identifiable. However, "madurez técnica declarada" is an opaque domain concept left undefined, and the description does nothing to distinguish it from the many similarly named obtener_* siblings (obtener_estado_workspace, obtener_datos_profesionales, obtener_estado_ampacidad).

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 rather than a sibling, no prerequisite, and no exclusion. With roughly a hundred sibling tools in this namespace, some routing hint was warranted and none is given.

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