Resumen

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the statistics are 'exactas' and lists the metrics computed, but it does not describe behavior around missing data, invalid codes, date range constraints, or other runtime characteristics.

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 filler. Every phrase contributes to stating the computation and its scope.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values do not need description coverage. However, with three required parameters at 0% schema coverage, no explicit usage routing, and an openWorldHint, the description leaves too much unexplained for an agent to reliably select and invoke the tool.

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 0% for three required parameters, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It only loosely implies a series identifier ('de una serie') and a date range ('del periodo'); it never names codigo, desde, or hasta, nor explains their formats or constraints.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Calcula estadísticas exactas de una serie', and enumerates the statistics (extremos, cambio, variación, promedio) plus the period scope. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings such as serie or comparar_series.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of alternatives. The agent can infer that this is for summary statistics over a period, but the description does not route it against buscar_series, serie, or comparar_series.

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