trazar_camino

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the algorithm ('en anchura' / breadth-first), the traversal relation ('a través de sus referencias'), and the depth limit ('hasta 6 saltos'). However, it does not disclose the return format or behavior when no path exists within the hop limit.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the action ('Busca en anchura') and packs all key constraints (reference traversal, 6-hop limit) with no filler. Every word contributes to the definition.

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?

The absence of an output schema makes the description responsible for specifying return values, but it does not state whether the tool returns an ordered path, a boolean, or null when no path exists. The inputs and search algorithm are clear, yet the missing output semantics is a significant gap for correct result interpretation.

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 100%: 'desde' and 'hasta' are already documented as initial and final exported symbols. The description adds relational meaning by clarifying that the tool seeks a path through references between these two endpoints, which the schema parameter descriptions alone do not convey.

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 states a specific operation: breadth-first search for a path between symbols through their references, up to 6 hops. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling search tools like buscar_referencias or buscar_simbolo, which handle single-symbol or reference lookups rather than endpoint-to-endpoint path tracing.

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 is a functional statement and does not explicitly say when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as buscar_referencias or buscar_simbolo. The intended use case (finding a connection between two exported symbols) is implied by the semantics but no exclusions or alternative-selection guidance is provided.

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