sii_bhe_list_recibidas

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

The description discloses that retencionEmisor is always null for received receipts due to SII behavior, which is a data quirk beyond the schema. It also states the authentication scope (persona, not empresa). Since no annotations are provided, this context is essential and well-addressed. It does not explicitly state the operation is read-only, but the listing verb implies it.

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 a single sentence with multiple clauses but every part contributes valuable info: purpose, fields, null field note, and auth scope. It is not excessively long and leads with the primary action.

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?

The description provides a complete picture for a list tool: what it lists, for whom, with which fields, and the null behavior. Since there is no output schema, enumerating the returned fields is critical and is done thoroughly. The auth note completes the context.

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?

Both parameters (anio, mes) are fully described in the JSON schema with ranges. The description only references them as 'en un mes' and does not add additional syntax or format details. Given 100% schema coverage, the description provides no extra value for parameters.

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 identifies the tool as listing received electronic fee receipts (boletas de honorarios electrónicas) for the authenticated person's RUT within a specified month. It specifies the exact fields returned and distinguishes from emitted receipts by the word 'recibidas' and the sibling 'sii_bhe_list_emitidas'.

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 notes that the tool operates at the persona level and does not require SII_EMPRESA_RUT, which helps users decide when to use this tool versus enterprise-level tools. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools by name or state when not to use it.

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