buscar_en_resolucion

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does reveal meaningful traits: local processing on the PC and filtered output (only matching paragraphs with context). However, it omits details like case sensitivity, error handling, or output pagination, which would be useful for a complete picture.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates purpose, method, and benefit. Every phrase earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

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 simple two-parameter interface and absence of an output schema, the description sufficiently conveys the tool's behavior and rationale. It lacks details on edge cases or return format, but for a focused search tool, it is adequately 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds little beyond the schema, only referring to 'palabras clave' and 'contexto', which does not significantly deepen understanding of the parameters' exact semantics.

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 searches for keywords within a TCP resolution, with a specific verb ('Busca') and resource ('resolución del TCP'). It also specifies the unique output behavior (returns only matching paragraphs with context), which distinguishes it from siblings like buscar_por_nombre or obtener_contenido_resolucion.

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?

Usage context is implied by the phrase 'para ahorrar tokens' and 'de forma local', suggesting this is for searching within an already identified resolution rather than fetching full content. However, there is no explicit mention of when to use it against alternatives, exclusions, or prerequisites.

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