bloquear_objeto

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the tool is a toggle ('o desbloquea'), which the name alone would hide, but says nothing about persistence, permissions, idempotency, or what happens when locking an already-locked object.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler and the core action stated first. It is efficient, though it is arguably too sparse for a 5-parameter mutation tool.

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?

With five parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description should explain how objects are addressed (type + 1-based index within the slide) and what a successful call returns or changes. It leaves both to inference.

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?

Schema coverage is only 40%, and the description mentions no parameter by name. The four required parameters (documento, diapositiva, tipo, indice) and the optional bloquear flag are left to the schema; indice and tipo in particular get no explanation of ordering or object identification from the description.

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?

States a specific verb (bloquear/desbloquear) applied to a concrete resource (un objeto) within a named context (Keynote, edición manual). An agent can distinguish it from mover_objeto or borrar_objeto, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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 phrase 'para que no se mueva por accidente al editar a mano' implies the scenario (protect objects before manual edits), but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not, no prerequisite about the presentation being open, and no guidance on which sibling to pick instead.

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