Descargar PDF de factura

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

readOnlyHint=true tells the agent the server-side invoice is not modified, but the description usefully adds that the output is written to a local path, which is a filesystem side effect the annotation does not capture. It stops short of saying whether an existing file is overwritten, whether the target directory must exist, or what happens on failure; the tension between readOnlyHint and a local file write is left unresolved.

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; the action and destination are stated immediately. It is efficient, though the brevity comes at the cost of the missing guidance 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 tool that writes a file to disk with no output schema and half its parameters undocumented, the description should cover overwrite behavior, directory requirements, and error cases but covers none. It is a minimal one-liner for a tool that has real side effects an agent needs to anticipate.

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 only 50%: rutaDestino is documented as an absolute path, but invoiceId has no description anywhere and the text merely says "de una factura" without clarifying where the ID comes from (e.g., cs_list_invoices) or its format. The description adds essentially no meaning beyond the schema.

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 verb "Descarga" plus resource "el PDF de una factura" clearly identifies the operation (retrieve an invoice PDF), which is distinct from data-returning siblings like cs_get_invoice or cs_list_invoices. However, the description does not explicitly name or differentiate it from those siblings, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this instead of cs_get_invoice or cs_attach_file, nor any stated prerequisites (valid invoiceId, existing directory, permissions). The agent must infer the use case entirely from the name and the single sentence.

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