dof_del_dia

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It adds only 'en vivo' (live) and the date override, but omits auth requirements, rate limits, read-only confirmation, return format, and pagination—all relevant for a live DOF feed.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately terse, though its brevity comes at the cost of the missing details noted elsewhere.

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 two-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is under-specified. It omits the `solo_normativas` parameter, does not explain the live behavior or return shape, and gives no usage 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?

Schema coverage is 0%: neither parameter has a description. The description explains `fecha` as an alternative to today but says nothing about `solo_normativas`, the boolean that defaults to true, leaving an important filter undocumented.

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 the resource (Diario Oficial de la Federación publication) and scope (today or given `fecha`), implying retrieval of that day's content. However, it uses no explicit verb and does not differentiate from siblings like `buscar_norma` or `leer_nota_dof`.

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?

Offers no when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use, and never names alternatives among the nine sibling tools. The optional date is mentioned only as an input variation, not as a routing condition.

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