Panel general

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds useful context that this is an aggregated snapshot spanning several domains rather than a single resource, but says nothing about cost, caching/freshness, or permission scope for a broad account-wide read.

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, listing the domains in a logical order. It is terse to the point of being a fragment (no verb like 'devuelve'), but nothing is 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?

The output schema carries the return shape, so the description needn't explain fields. What's missing is routing guidance among many overlapping read tools — the main thing an agent needs to call this correctly — leaving the definition adequate but with a clear gap.

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?

Zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 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?

Names the resource (cuenta) and enumerates what the rollup contains (cultivos, salud, dispositivos en línea, comandos, avisos), which makes the composite/dashboard nature clear. It stops short of distinguishing itself from siblings like get_account, get_fleet or get_readings_summary, which an agent could easily confuse with it.

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 statement of when to prefer this over get_account or the per-domain tools (list_crops, list_notifications, get_readings_summary). An agent must infer that this is the one-call snapshot and the others are drill-downs.

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