es__detect_regional_regime

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It conveys that this is a read-only detection operation ('Detecta', 'Devuelve') and discloses the possible result values. It does not discuss invalid-province handling or explicitly state side-effect-free behavior, but for this simple routing tool the behavior is sufficiently transparent.

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 compact and front-loaded: it states the purpose first, then the input basis, possible outputs, and the universal usage precondition. Every sentence earns its place and no information is redundant.

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 two-parameter routing tool with a full input schema, an output schema, and an explicit usage mandate, the description is complete. It gives the agent everything needed to call it correctly and know what it will return.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by linking the province code to regional regime selection and by hinting at the role of SII through the 'VERIFACTU+SII' output value, which is not fully explained in the schema alone.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Detecta el régimen de facturación electrónica aplicable.' It then names the exact output values (VERIFACTU, TICKETBAI, NATICKET, VERIFACTU+SII) and the input basis, which clearly separates this detection/routing tool from the generation, submission, and validation siblings.

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 gives an explicit, unambiguous usage rule: 'Usar siempre antes de llamar a cualquier otra herramienta de este servidor.' This tells the agent exactly when to invoke it and assigns it a mandatory prerequisite role relative to all sibling tools.

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