es_search_aepd_resolutions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the functional scoping (full text/date) but does not add behavioral traits like pagination behavior, rate limits, or response format beyond what the schema provides.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It conveys the essential information efficiently.

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 search tool with full schema coverage, good annotations, and an output schema, the one-sentence description is adequate to understand its purpose. It could add examples of expediente-number queries or clarify behavior with no filters, but these are already covered by the schema descriptions, so no critical gaps exist.

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%, with each parameter (page, texto, fecha_desde, fecha_hasta) already described in detail. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 a specific verb ('Search'), a specific resource ('AEPD resolutions'), and the search dimensions ('by full text and/or signature date'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like es_get_aepd_resolution (retrieval) and es_search_constitutional (different authority).

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 (use when searching by text or date) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives. The distinction from es_get_aepd_resolution is implicit through the verb 'search' versus 'get', but no alternative guidance is provided.

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