Detalle de un código CABYS

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds useful return-field information (description, IVA rate, categories) that matters because there is no output schema, but it omits invalid-code behavior and any rate/auth context.

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?

A single efficient sentence that front-loads the returned fields and ends with the key input constraint. No filler or repetition.

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 one-parameter lookup with readOnly annotations and no output schema, the description names the key return fields so the agent knows what to expect. Only explicit sibling routing and invalid-code behavior are missing.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the schema already documents the single codigo parameter with its 13-digit format and example. The description merely repeats the 13-digit constraint without adding format or validation meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Names a specific resource (a 13-digit CABYS code) and states the fields returned: description, IVA rate, and categories. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling buscar_cabys, so it falls short of a 5.

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 13-digit exact-code phrasing implies this is a lookup tool for when the code is already known, but it never says so explicitly or names buscar_cabys as the alternative. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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