sii_dte_list_documentos_recibidos

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits but only mentions the digital certificate requirement. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, describe return format, pagination, or error handling, which is a significant gap for a list operation.

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 two short, front-loaded sentences that deliver the core purpose and a prerequisite without unnecessary words. Every phrase earns its place, making it ideal for quick parsing.

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 6 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It omits details about filtering behavior, return structure, or how the certificate integrates with the parameters, leaving the agent without enough context for correct invocation.

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 83% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema already provides; it only hints at the overall purpose of listing received DTEs.

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 function with a specific verb ('Lista') and resource ('DTEs recibidos por la empresa'), and explicitly names the context ('Consultas DTE del SII'). It distinguishes from the sibling tool for issued documents ('emitidos') through the word 'recibidos'.

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 a prerequisite ('Requiere certificado digital') but offers no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives. It does not mention the sibling tool for issued documents or any selection criteria, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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