Obteniendo dispositivo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses a meaningful behavioral trait (the integral text can be very long) and documents default behavior (cuadernillo auto-resolved from OP; empty desde/hasta returns full text). It omits auth/permission or error behavior, but for a read-only retrieval tool the disclosure is solid.

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?

Front-loads the return contents, then a usage note, then a structured Args block. Every sentence carries information and nothing is padded, though the Args block is somewhat verbose in restating each parameter.

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?

With no output schema or annotations, the description fills the gap by describing the returned fields, the parameter semantics, and the alternative tool. It is complete for calling the tool correctly, with only incidental gaps around error or edge-case behavior.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does thoroughly: cuadernillo is a publication sigla that is optional and auto-resolved from OP; op is a numero de orden with a format example ('2558398-1'); desde/hasta are optional 1-indexed inclusive paragraph ranges where empty means full text. This adds real meaning well beyond the bare schema titles.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Devuelve el dispositivo completo') and enumerates the returned fields (sumilla, tipo, numero, sector, fechas, texto integral, pdf_url, thumbnail). It distinguishes itself from obtener_dispositivo_texto, though it does not clearly set itself apart from buscar_por_op or buscar_dispositivos.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: for long documents use obtener_dispositivo_texto with paragraph ranges, or constrain this call with desde/hasta. It also points to listar_tipos_publicacion for the cuadernillo argument. Both the alternative and the condition selecting it are named.

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