Obtener el detalle completo de un establecimiento

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

There are no annotations to carry the safety profile, so the description must convey behavior on its own. The verb 'Obtiene' implies a read-only operation and 'ficha completa' hints at the response scope, but the description does not disclose error behavior, what happens for an invalid ID, or whether any special authorization is needed. This is adequate but leaves gaps.

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?

A single sentence conveys the operation, resource, input, and source of that input with no redundant words. All essential information is front-loaded and clearly structured.

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 one-parameter retrieval tool with no output schema, the description provides the key operational context: what it returns, what input it needs, and where that input comes from. It could be more complete only by mentioning error or edge-case behavior, but the low complexity makes the current description nearly sufficient.

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 schema already documents 'id' as the DENUE establishment ID with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema by stating that the ID comes from another search, which helps the agent understand how to obtain and supply this value correctly.

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 ('Obtiene'), a specific resource ('la ficha completa de un establecimiento economico'), and the required input ('ID de DENUE'). It is immediately distinguishable from sibling search tools like denue_buscar_por_nombre and denue_buscar_por_estado, which are broader lookups rather than detail retrieval by ID.

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 'obtenido de otra busqueda' explicitly frames this tool as a follow-up to a previous search, giving clear context for when it should be used. It does not name the alternative search tools explicitly or state when not to use them, so it stops just short of a perfect score.

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