List services

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the bar is lower. The description adds value by disclosing that each entry has a stable slug, a human-readable name, optional description, and especially the requires_matricula flag. This behavioral detail aids agent reasoning beyond what annotations supply.

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?

Single paragraph, no filler. Front-loads the purpose, then details output fields, and ends with usage recommendation. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, this description is fully complete. It explains the return structure, the meaning of each field, and the tool's role in the larger workflow (mapping natural language to slugs for sibling tools).

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?

No parameters exist (0 params), and schema coverage is 100%. Per rubric baseline 4, since there is nothing to add. The description could not add parameter meaning because there are none.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'every service category Muovi supports in Argentina'. It explicitly distinguishes the tool from siblings by explaining how its output (slugs) feeds into muovi_search_professionals and muovi_create_task_link, making its role unique.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this first when you need to map a user's natural-language request to a Muovi service slug.' Also explains that slugs are stable and reused elsewhere, giving clear context for invocation order.

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