Listando filtros

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and largely meets it: it discloses local pagination (100 values/page), the 1..3 'paginas' cap with a 'nota' truncation flag, and that the full 'sentidos' response is ~86 KB and may be client-truncated. It stops short of stating read-only/auth expectations, but the behavioral surface is well covered.

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-loaded with the catalog list and counts, then Args, then returns; every sentence carries operational detail. It is dense and somewhat long, but no clear filler remains.

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?

Despite an output schema existing, the description adds the exact return shape (id/nombre/slug/search_elastic), the pagination cursor fields, and the truncation 'nota'. Combined with the parameter constraints, nothing an agent needs to call and chain this into busqueda_avanzada is missing.

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 0% and no enums exist, so the description must compensate fully — and it does, defining 'categoria' values, 'page' as 1-based at 100 values/page with detail-only applicability, and 'paginas' bounded at 1..3 with its overflow behavior. Every parameter is semantically documented 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 names a specific verb+resource ('Catálogo EXACTO para busqueda_avanzada') and enumerates exactly which catalogs it returns, with record counts for each. An agent can immediately distinguish it from sibling busqueda_avanzada, which consumes these ids rather than producing them.

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 states the downstream consumer explicitly ('los id alimentan busqueda_avanzada') and distinguishes 'todos' (counts only) from detail categories. It does not, however, contrast usage against other sibling listar_* tools such as listar_tesauro or listar_palabras, so routing among those is left to inference.

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