Extraer Listas de Precio por producto

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

The description discloses that the tool generates an .xlsx file and returns its first rows already parsed, which goes beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint) by adding the side effect of file creation and the return format. This is valuable behavioral context, though it doesn't detail the full response envelope or overwrite behavior.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and immediate behavior. No filler or repetition, making it appropriately sized for a tool with detailed schema documentation.

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?

The tool has 12 parameters and no output schema. The description states the core behavior but leaves ambiguity about the full response structure (e.g., how rows are wrapped, whether the generated file path is included). Given the complexity and missing output schema, the description is minimally sufficient but not fully 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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters with rich descriptions including defaults, examples, enums, and security notes (e.g., 'clave' never returned). The tool description itself adds no parameter-specific detail, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage.

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 'Extraer Listas de Precio por producto' with a specific verb and resource, and references the GETLIS function. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pushlis (the push counterpart) and other getters by naming the exact product and concept.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The only mention of another tool is in the parameter schema (siigo_list_companies), not in the tool description. Usage is implied from the title and function name, but no exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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