Obtener Departamentos por Región

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

The annotations already provide comprehensive behavioral information (readOnlyHint: true, openWorldHint: true, idempotentHint: true, destructiveHint: false). The description adds useful context about what the tool returns ('Lista de departamentos de esa región') and provides concrete usage examples that help the agent understand typical queries. This goes beyond what annotations provide, though it doesn't mention potential limitations like rate limits or authentication needs.

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 perfectly structured and concise. It starts with the core purpose, then provides parameter details with valuable mappings, return information, and practical usage examples. Every sentence serves a clear purpose with zero wasted words. The information is front-loaded with the most important details first.

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 lookup tool with comprehensive annotations and a single well-documented parameter, this description is complete. It explains what the tool does, documents the parameter semantics thoroughly, shows what it returns, and provides usage examples. The lack of an output schema is compensated by the clear return description. No additional context is needed for this type of tool.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already fully documents the single parameter. However, the description adds significant value by providing a complete mapping of region_id values to region names (1=Caribe, 2=Pacífico, etc.), which is crucial semantic information that helps the agent understand what each numeric ID represents. This goes well beyond the baseline expectation.

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 with specific verb ('Obtiene' - gets) and resource ('departamentos que pertenecen a una región específica' - departments belonging to a specific region). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_departments' (which presumably gets all departments) by specifying the regional filtering aspect.

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: when you need departments filtered by region. The usage examples reinforce this context. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention specific alternatives among the sibling tools (like when to use 'get_departments' instead).

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