Obtener Información de Colombia

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

The annotations already provide comprehensive behavioral hints (readOnlyHint: true, openWorldHint: true, idempotentHint: true, destructiveHint: false), so the description's burden is reduced. It adds some context about what information is returned ('nombre, capital, bandera, moneda, etc.'), but doesn't provide additional behavioral details like response format, data freshness, or limitations.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement, return information, and usage examples. It's appropriately sized for a simple lookup tool. The Spanish/English mix is slightly inconsistent but doesn't significantly impact clarity.

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 simple read-only country information tool with comprehensive annotations but no output schema, the description provides adequate coverage. It explains what information is returned and gives usage examples, though it could be more specific about the exact data structure returned or limitations of the information.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage (empty schema). The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist, which is correct for this case. No additional parameter information is needed or provided.

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's purpose: 'Obtiene información general sobre Colombia como país' (Gets general information about Colombia as a country). It specifies the verb ('obtiene') and resource ('información general sobre Colombia'), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_president' or 'get_departments' which provide more specific information subsets.

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 provides usage examples that imply when to use this tool ('¿Cuál es la capital de Colombia?' and 'Dame información general de Colombia'), suggesting it's for general country overview questions. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternatives among the many sibling tools for more specific queries.

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