contar_personas_contratadas

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the behavior of distinguishing person types but lacks information on safety (e.g., read-only, destructive), authentication needs, or rate limits. For a tool with zero annotations, this is insufficient.

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 concise and structured with bullet points for return values. It is front-loaded with the tool's purpose. One minor issue: the first sentence is somewhat passive ('Cuenta personas contratadas y valores por año'), but overall efficient.

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 3 parameters and no annotations but has an output schema. The description explains the output well but lacks full parameter descriptions and usage guidance. For a relatively simple aggregation tool, it is adequate but not 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%. The description mentions 'entidad' indirectly and 'por año' for 'anios', but does not explain the 'solo_personas_naturales' boolean parameter explicitly, though it relates to the natural vs legal person distinction. Given low coverage, the description should provide more detail.

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 counts hired people and values per year for an entity, listing specific return fields (unique persons/providers, total contracts, total contracted value, total paid value). It also distinguishes between natural and legal persons, which differentiates it from sibling tools like 'agregaciones_contratacion'.

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 mentions 'Ideal para KPIs de contratación', implying a usage context, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any when-not guidance. No sibling tool names are referenced.

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