detalle_url_docente

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the accepted URL patterns and portal restriction, which is useful. But it does not describe potential side effects, authentication requirements, or behavior for invalid/malformed URLs, leaving some transparency gap.

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?

Two sentences: the first states purpose with examples, the second adds a constraint. No unnecessary words, clearly front-loaded.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers what the tool does, what input it expects, and an important constraint. Minor gaps remain around the exact meaning of 'resume' and error handling, but overall it's sufficiently contextualized.

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 provides only a 'url' string with no description. The description enriches this by specifying the required URL format with examples and the portal restriction, giving essential context for calling the tool correctly.

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 summarizes detailed URLs from the Guaraní Docente portal and provides concrete URL pattern examples, distinguishing it from sibling tools that target specific detail types (cursada, mesa, etc.). The verb 'resume' is slightly ambiguous but contextually means 'summarize/resolve'.

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 implies usage when the agent has a detail URL and needs summary data, and explicitly limits input to URLs from the configured portal. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling detail tools (e.g., detalle_cursada_docente) or state when to prefer this over them.

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