buscar_por_cita

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses an important behavioral guardrail: nonexistent citations will not be substituted or replaced. This meaningfully prevents the agent from expecting fuzzy matches or fabricated results.

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 a single sentence with no filler, and the key action ('Localiza una cita TSPR exacta') is front-loaded. Every word 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 single-parameter lookup tool with an output schema, the description covers the core purpose and a key behavior. However, it omits citation format details and does not explicitly position the tool among the many sibling search tools, so the overall context is only minimally complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must clarify the parameter. It adds that 'cita' should be an exact TSPR citation, which is useful, but it does not provide a format, example, or explanation of what counts as an exact citation, leaving a gap.

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 uses a specific verb ('Localiza') and a specific resource ('una cita TSPR exacta'), making the core action immediately clear. The phrase 'sin sustituir citas inexistentes' also distinguishes it from fuzzy or fallback search tools among the siblings.

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 exact-match language implies this tool should be used when the agent has a precise TSPR citation to look up. However, it does not explicitly state when-not-to-use it or name an alternative sibling, leaving some selection inference to the agent.

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