Listar publicaciones

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds that the data are 'sincronizadas' and enumerates the returned fields. This is useful context beyond the annotations, though nothing further about auth, pagination, or rate limits is disclosed.

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 short sentences, each carrying substantive value: one defines the resource and content, the other describes the filtering option. No filler or redundancy.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers the result fields, the sync scope, and the search capability; the schema covers the optional parameters and limits. Minor omissions such as default ordering are acceptable given the annotations.

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 description's only parameter guidance ('buscar por título o MLA') largely repeats the schema's existing property description for 'buscar'. It adds no meaning for 'cuenta' or 'limite', and at 67% schema coverage the description does not compensate for the gap.

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 title 'Listar publicaciones' and description 'Publicaciones sincronizadas con título, precio, stock, vendidos, estado y link' clearly identify a list operation over publication records with specific output fields. This distinguishes it from sibling mutation tools like ml_actualizar_publicacion and from metrics/panel tools.

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 indicates the tool lists synchronized publications and accepts a text filter, which implies when to use it, but it does not explicitly state conditions or exclusions relative to the many sibling tools. No alternatives are named, so an agent must infer the decision.

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