uned_progreso_marcar

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the allowed estado values (pendiente, leyendo, visto, repasado, dominado), which the schema lacks, but it says nothing about permissions, whether the update is reversible, or what happens to a previously set state. Genuine but partial behavioral disclosure.

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 tight sentences: purpose first, then per-parameter hints. No filler. Slightly terse rather than padded, which is the right trade-off here.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the estado enumeration is helpful. However, the missing semantics for asignatura and the absence of any usage/routing guidance leave real gaps for a 4-parameter mutation tool with no 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains tema (name or number, with an example) and nota (optional comment, with examples), and lists estado's possible values, but the required asignatura parameter is left entirely unexplained. Partial compensation only.

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?

Estates a specific verb (Actualiza) plus resource (estado de un tema) and enumerates the valid states, so an agent immediately understands the operation. It is distinguishable from the sibling uned_progreso (which reads progress), though it does not name that sibling explicitly.

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 says what the tool does but offers no when-to-use / when-not-to-use guidance and does not name alternatives such as uned_progreso. Usage is only implied by the verb, and no prerequisites (e.g. login) are mentioned.

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