Listando sistematizaciones

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does convey that the tree is COMPLETE (no pagination or filtering implied) and sketches the return shape, which is useful, but it says nothing about auth, rate limits, or why the tree is static/cacheable. An output schema already exists, so the return-value sketch earns only partial credit.

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?

Purpose and the cross-tool routing are front-loaded in the first sentence, with the return block last. The 'Devuelve:' block is largely redundant given an output schema exists, costing a little efficiency but not enough to break the structure.

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 zero-parameter, read-only listing whose output schema already documents the response, the description supplies what is missing: how many branches exist, how children are organized, and how the ids feed the sibling tool. Nothing essential for correct invocation is absent.

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 tool takes zero parameters, which is the baseline-4 case. The description introduces id concepts ('1', '268') but these belong to resultados_sistematizacion, not to this tool's inputs, so no additional parameter meaning is needed or expected.

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+resource: returns the COMPLETE taxonomy tree of the TC's systematization, with 6 thematic branches and type/node children. This clearly separates it from siblings like resultados_sistematizacion (which returns results) and listar_tesauro/listar_filtros (other taxonomies).

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 to a sibling workflow: 'Usa los "id" en resultados_sistematizacion', telling the agent the ids produced here are consumed there, and with concrete examples ('1' = Precedentes vinculantes, '268' = Habeas corpus). No exclusions versus listar_tesauro/listar_filtros are given, so it stops short of a full 5.

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