listar_consejerias

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It explains the tool returns consejerías with ids and notes that department 1 is the usual one, providing useful context. But it doesn't cover output format, error behavior, or side effects, which is a moderate gap for a listing tool.

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 extremely concise at two sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded and a helpful hint appended. Every sentence contributes value, and there is no wasted text.

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 simple listing tool with one parameter, the description covers the essential: what it returns, why it's used, and a key hint for the parameter. The absence of output schema and annotations is partially mitigated by this clear purpose, though edge cases are not addressed.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It states that department 1 is CIUDAD AUTÓNOMA DE MELILLA, which gives some meaning to the departamento parameter, but it doesn't explain valid values, ranges, or how to discover other departments. This is insufficient compensation for a completely undocumented parameter.

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 lists consejerías for a department and provides their ids for filtering. It names the specific resource and purpose, distinguishing it from generic listing tools, though it doesn't explicitly compare to siblings like listar_organismos.

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?

The description gives a clear use case: obtaining ids to use with buscar_bomes/buscar_articulos. However, it doesn't mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, leaving some ambiguity about selection among sibling tools.

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