Listar datasets del INDEC

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: no token required and no data consultation, plus the shape of the returned catalog entries (which matters since there is no output schema).

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns and followed by the entry-point guidance and the no-token/no-data caveats. Nothing is redundant with the title or wasted.

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 output schema, the description compensates by listing the catalog fields returned, and it clarifies the auth-free, read-only nature of the call. For a one-optional-parameter listing tool, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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 100% and the single optional 'area' parameter is well documented in the schema itself, so the baseline is 3. The description never mentions filtering by area and adds no syntax or matching-behavior detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 and resource ('Lista el catálogo de los datasets de la API del INDEC') and even enumerates the returned fields (id, área, frecuencia, resumen). The phrase 'No consulta datos' separates it cleanly from siblings like indec_query_dataset and indec_describe_dataset.

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?

'Empezá por acá para saber qué datos existen' gives an explicit entry-point instruction, and 'No consulta datos' implicitly steers the agent away from using it to fetch values. It stops short of naming which sibling to use for actual data retrieval, so the routing is clear but not complete.

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