Obteniendo fichas en lote

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the cap of 50, duplicate handling, and that failed indices are returned in 'faltas' with reasons, but it omits safety traits such as read-only nature or session prerequisites.

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 compact and well-structured with Args and Devuelve sections, front-loading the batch purpose and return shape. It is appropriately sized for a two-parameter tool with no wasted sentences.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description supplies the return structure, failure handling, cap, and parameter meanings. It could be more complete by explicitly stating that 'ses' and valid indices come from a prior search call, but the essentials are present.

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. It defines both parameters: 'ses' as the search session and 'indices' as a list of global indices with an example and a note that duplicates are processed once, adding meaningful semantics beyond the bare schema.

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 it retrieves a batch of records/summaries from the same search in one call, with a cap and deduplication note. It is specific about the resource and scope, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools like ficha_resolucion to sharpen differentiation.

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?

It gives context that all indices must come from the same search and that this is a batch operation with a 50-item cap. However, it does not state when to prefer this over ficha_resolucion for a single record or buscar_resoluciones for searching, leaving alternatives implicit.

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