buscar_ocos

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose return columns, page size (15 filas por pagina), the paginas range (1..8), and the session-reuse rule (re-executing with the same 'ses' without emitting a new id). It does not state permissions/auth or read-only status, but the behavioral coverage is well above average for a search tool.

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 followed by structured Args/Devuelve blocks, so an agent can scan it quickly. It is somewhat verbose, but nearly every line (format examples, return fields, session rule) carries information an agent would otherwise lack.

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 supplies the return field list, pagination rules, and session semantics, which is substantial. Minor gaps remain (no-results/error behavior, explicit read-only statement, and a mismatch where the text calls anio/mes/ruc OBLIGATORIO while the schema marks them nullable).

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 documents all 7 parameters: marks anio/mes/ruc as required with format examples ('2026', '9' o 'setiembre'), explains entidad as exact name, defines pagina/paginas semantics, and clarifies ses reuse behavior. This fully compensates for the empty 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?

States a specific verb (Busca) and resource (ORDENES DE COMPRA Y ORDENES DE SERVICIO, OC/OS) plus the source system (SEACE). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like buscar_contratos, buscar_procesos, and buscar_cco.

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?

Gives concrete guidance: RUC 'hallalo con buscar_entidades', and explains the ses parameter for requesting siguiente_pagina or re-searching with different filters. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or a direct sibling alternative for order-vs-contract queries, but the operational context is clear.

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