es__generate_verifactu_record

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It explains generation and output (XML, hash) but does not disclose error conditions, permission needs, or side effects. Core behavior is covered, but safety details are missing.

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?

Two sentences with no superfluous text. First sentence defines action and output; second provides critical prerequisite. Extremely efficient.

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, description covers return values (XML and hash) and chaining. Mentions prerequisite call. Could benefit from error handling notes, but sufficient for typical usage.

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. Description adds context about the chaining nature of previous_hash and the purpose (SHA-256 Huella). Does not significantly improve understanding beyond schema descriptions.

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?

Description explicitly states it generates a VERI*FACTU invoice record with SHA-256 hash chain, returns XML and hash for chaining. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like es__generate_facturae_xml or es__generate_ticketbai_xml.

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?

Provides explicit prerequisite: 'Llame a es__detect_regional_regime antes' and states the return of hash for chaining. While it doesn't list exclusive alternatives, the guidance on when to invoke is helpful.

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