leer_sentencia

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the disclosure burden. It states that the tool reads a public source and returns extracted passages, implying a read-only behavior, but it does not describe error behavior, output structure nuances, or limitations such as whether only publicly accessible URLs work.

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 one short, focused sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and object and effectively communicates the primary purpose in minimal space.

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?

While an output schema exists and the tool appears simple, the description omits how to use the optional parameters and gives no guidance for selecting this tool over its many siblings. An agent needs more context to invoke this tool correctly with the right parameter semantics.

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 compensate for the parameters, but it does not. It mentions 'fuente' and 'pasajes', which vaguely relates to url and max_parrafos, but it never explains how 'terminos' filters results or how 'max_parrafos' controls output volume.

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 the specific verb 'Lee' and identifies the resource ('sentencia pública') and the outcome ('devuelve pasajes extraídos de la fuente'). It is clear about the tool's core function, though it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like buscar_sentencias.

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 implies a clear use case: read a public judgment from a provided URL and obtain extracted passages. However, it gives no explicit conditions for when to choose this tool over siblings such as buscar_sentencias or investigar_sentencias, nor does it state any exclusions.

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