zyta_expedientes_create

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It indicates creation without a portal, notes it counts toward a plan quota ('Cuenta para el cupo del plan'), and implies a mutation. It does not detail side effects or the response structure, but the core behavior is clear.

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 concise sentences with front-loaded primary action. No redundant or vague language.

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 create tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It omits error conditions, prerequisites, and return value information. Adequate but could be more comprehensive.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline 3. The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond what the schema provides (e.g., no format constraints or examples).

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 specifies the action 'Crea una causa sin portal (fichero propio)', including the HTTP endpoint and context (cuenta para cupo, no aplica a causas PJN/MEV/CABA). It clearly distinguishes from other tools by describing the scope.

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?

The description states when not to use it ('No aplica a causas PJN/MEV/CABA'), providing exclusion criteria. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools for those excluded cases, leaving the agent to infer from sibling names.

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