elegir_plan_pago

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the side effect (widget advances to terms confirmation), the return value (message with monthly installment, total payment, interest), and a prerequisite (amount and day captured). This goes beyond simple operation semantics, though it does not address error conditions or auth requirements.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, then usage context, then return value. No redundant information, every sentence earns its place.

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 one-parameter selection tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, when to call it, prerequisite state, side effect, and return value. It is fully self-contained for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates by explaining the meaning of the plan choice (12, 24, or 36 cuotas) in the context of the flow. It does not explicitly name the parameter 'cuotas' but the enum values are clearly tied to the plan selection. The description also adds output semantics beyond the schema.

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 a specific action ('Selecciona uno de los tres planes de pago disponibles') with a precise resource (12, 24, or 36 cuotas) and context (solicitud with monto and día already captured). It also distinguishes from sibling tools by placing it in the flow before confirmation.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: normally the widget calls it on user click, and the agent can call it when the user states a plan choice in chat. It also implies the prerequisite that amount and day must already be captured. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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