Resolver dictamen por número

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. The description only states 'Deep-link / búsqueda' without explaining whether the tool is read-only, what it returns, or any side effects. It fails to convey basic behavioral information beyond the name.

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 very concise (one line), but it is too short to be effective. While it front-loads the purpose, it omits essential information such as usage context, parameters, and behavior. Conciseness is achieved at the expense of completeness, making it minimally adequate.

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?

Given the lack of annotations, no output schema, and only 50% parameter coverage, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the return value, authentication needs, or how the 'deep-link' works. The tool's complexity is low, but the description still fails to provide a complete picture.

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?

The input schema has 50% coverage (only 'formato' has a description). The tool description adds no parameter information, so it does not compensate for the missing 'numero' description. It provides no meaning beyond what the schema already offers, leaving the required parameter 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?

The description 'Deep-link / búsqueda por número de dictamen CGR' clearly states the action (deep-link/search) and the resource (dictamen by number). It distinguishes from the general search tool 'buscar_dictamenes' by specifying direct access via number. However, the term 'resolver' in the title is ambiguous, and the description could more explicitly state that it retrieves a specific dictamen.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not clarify that this tool is for direct lookup by number, while 'buscar_dictamenes' is for broader searches. The absence of any usage context or exclusions reduces its helpfulness.

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