vigilante_contrato_plazos

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly implies a pure calculation with no stated side effects, but does not disclose the safety profile (read-only?), the assumptions baked in (e.g. the default 60-day preaviso), or what the computed output looks like.

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 the verb first and zero filler. Every element (notice, eviction, renewal window, contract scope) 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?

No output schema and no annotations, so the description must carry more weight. It says what is computed but not the shape of the result or the assumptions behind the calculation, leaving the agent short of the information needed to interpret the return value.

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 100%, so the three parameters are already documented in the schema, establishing a baseline of 3. The description names the concepts being computed but adds no parameter-level detail (formats, constraints, effect of the preaviso default) beyond what the schema provides.

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 ('Calcula') plus a rich, precise resource set ('plazos de preaviso, desahucio y ventanas críticas de renovación automática') and a bounded scope ('contratos civiles y comerciales'). No sibling in the list computes contract deadlines, so an agent can select this unambiguously.

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 scope (civil and commercial contracts) implies when the tool applies, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance and no alternative sibling is named. Usage must be inferred from the purpose statement alone.

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