Obtener Departamentos de Colombia

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds value by specifying the return format (list with id, nombre, capital, población, superficie, región) and clarifying that Bogotá D.C. is included. However, it doesn't mention potential limitations like rate limits or authentication needs beyond what annotations provide.

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 efficiently structured: first sentence states the core purpose, second specifies the return format, and third provides usage examples. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. It's appropriately sized for a simple data retrieval tool.

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 the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, rich annotations), the description is nearly complete. It covers purpose, return format, and usage examples. The only minor gap is lack of explicit guidance on when to use alternative tools like get_departments_by_region for filtered results.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately focuses on output semantics, detailing the structure of returned data. This exceeds the baseline expectation for a zero-parameter tool.

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 los 32 departamentos de Colombia más Bogotá D.C.' This specifies the exact resource (Colombian departments plus Bogotá D.C.) and action (obtains/gets). It distinguishes from siblings like get_department (singular) and get_departments_by_region (filtered).

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 clear context for when to use this tool through example queries: '¿Cuáles son los departamentos de Colombia?' and 'Lista todos los departamentos.' This indicates it's for comprehensive listing without filtering. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it (e.g., for filtered results use get_departments_by_region).

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