Buscando entidades

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and adds real context: the 'ses' is a GLOBAL session shared across tools, and omitting it opens a temporary one. The return shape is also disclosed. It stops short of stating read-only/auth/rate-limit behavior, but for a lookup tool this is substantially informative.

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 purpose sentence, then a compact Args/Devuelve structure. Every line earns its place, and the crucial session semantics and return shape are conveyed without padding.

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 and no annotations, the description steps in to document the return dict ({ok, ses, total, filas:[...]}) and how to consume it. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly or chain it 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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description compensates fully for all four params: nombre (with an example), ruc (exactly 11 digits), sigla, and ses (shared/global, temporary if omitted). Each parameter gains meaning richer than the bare schema types.

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 (Busca), a precise resource (ENTIDADES del Estado peruano), the source (buscador SEACE), and the search keys (nombre, RUC o sigla). This is unmistakably distinct from siblings like buscar_procesos or buscar_ocos, which target different SEACE resources.

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 downstream: use the returned 'ruc' for buscar_ocos and the exact name for buscar_procesos(entidad=...). It does not state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or prerequisites, so it stops short of a full when/when-not spec.

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