zyta_expedientes_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read operation via the verb 'Lee' and the GET method, which implies non-destructiveness. However, it does not disclose authorization needs, rate limits, or what 'actuaciones' entails beyond the basic reading. This is adequate but minimal for a read tool.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's operation, resource, and portal scope. No redundant information—every word is useful.

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?

Given no output schema, the description should explain the return value (e.g., what fields are included, especially 'actuaciones'). It does not mention error cases, pagination, or response structure. For a read tool with single parameter, this is a significant omission.

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% (single parameter 'id' described as 'UUID del expediente'). The description adds the URL format, which provides context but no extra semantic detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema covers the parameter well.

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 clearly states the tool reads an expediente (file) with actions, specifies the HTTP method and path (GET /judicial/expedientes/:id), and mentions it works for any portal. This distinguishes it from siblings like crear (create), eliminar (delete), listar (list), etc.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it is implied that you use it when you have an ID, the description does not contrast it with zyta_expedientes_list or other search tools. The phrase 'cualquier portal' hints at broad applicability but lacks exclusion criteria.

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