Consultar departamentos, distritos y ciudades

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered without the description. The description adds the hierarchical dependency between nivel and id plus the fact that results feed receptor addresses, but it says nothing about result size, ordering, caching, or failure behavior for "departamentos" which lists everything.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and then the per-level rules; nothing is redundant padding and the critical per-mode constraint comes before the closing context sentence.

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 2-parameter read-only lookup with full schema coverage and annotations, the description covers purpose, mode semantics and id requirements. The only gap is that no output schema exists and the description never indicates what a result item looks like (code plus name), leaving the agent to infer the return shape.

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% and the schema already documents both `id` (required for distritos/ciudades, with which entity's id) and `nivel` (enum). The description restates the same rules in prose, reinforcing but not extending them beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific resource (SIFEN geographic catalog for domiciles) and enumerates its three modes (departamentos, distritos, ciudades) with their scoping rules. No sibling tool touches geography, so the agent can distinguish it from the rest of the toolset immediately.

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?

It states concretely when each nivel applies and that `id` is required for the two sub-levels, which is exactly the decision the agent must make before calling. It also gives the downstream purpose ("Los códigos se usan en el domicilio del receptor"), though it names no alternative tool or exclusion cases.

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