estado_prestamo

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is internal, returns the loan status in structuredContent, and should not be invoked by the agent. This goes beyond the schema, which has no parameters, and gives the agent a clear behavioral guardrail.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and then the critical restriction. Every word earns its place; there is zero unnecessary information.

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 an internal tool that the agent must not invoke, the description is complete. It states what the tool does and explicitly forbids its use. Sibling tools provide context for what the agent should use instead, but the description itself suffices for its intended purpose.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline score is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific details, but none are needed. The mention of 'structuredContent' hints at the return format, which is useful.

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: 'devuelve el estado actual del préstamo en structuredContent' (returns the current loan status in structuredContent). It uses a specific verb and resource, and explicitly labels it as an internal widget tool, distinguishing it from the agent-facing sibling tools.

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 explicitly states 'NO debe ser invocada por el agente' (should not be invoked by the agent), providing a clear when-not-to-use directive. However, it does not name an alternative tool, so it does not fully meet the 'alternatives' criterion for a 5.

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