Mapa de ventas por provincia

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the tool returns an aggregated provincial distribution rather than raw sales data, but does not describe response format, time windows, or account-scoping behavior.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The core meaning ('Distribución de las ventas por provincia') is front-loaded, and the second sentence provides useful business context without 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 tool with one optional parameter, the description covers purpose and usage well. Since there is no output schema, a bit more detail about the exact response format could have been helpful, but the tool is simple enough that the description is largely 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 100%, and the only parameter 'cuenta' has a clear description in the schema. The tool description adds no extra parameter meaning, but given full schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the tool's output: sales distribution by province ('Distribución de las ventas por provincia'). This is a specific, province-level resource that is distinct from the broader sibling tools, though it does not explicitly name a differentiating sibling or use an action verb.

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 phrase 'Sirve para decidir depósitos, costos de envío o dónde pautar' gives concrete business contexts in which the tool is useful. It provides clear usage context without explicitly stating when not to use it or naming alternative tools.

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