render_mapa

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

No annotations are present, so the description is the only source of behavioral information. While it notes the tool returns a file path, it does not disclose side effects such as file creation/overwriting, required permissions, idempotency, or error behavior. This is insufficient for a tool that likely writes files.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the main action. No unnecessary words; it efficiently conveys the primary function and the return value.

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 the output schema exists and the description mentions the return type, the tool has required parameters with no descriptions and no annotations. The overall context (prerequisites, relationship to sibling tools like detectar_sinergias) is missing, making it inadequate for correct invocation.

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%, and the description provides no explanation of the 'ruta' and 'documento' parameters. Their names give limited clues, but the required 'documento' parameter is not defined, leaving the agent unable to construct a valid invocation confidently.

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 clearly states the tool's function: generating the interactive synergy map ('mapa interactivo de sinergias') and returning the file path. The verb 'Genera' and the specific resource distinguish it from sibling render tools like render_guia and render_chuleta.

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. It does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios where other render tools (e.g., render_guia) would be more appropriate.

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