codigos_proceso

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the return shape and the meaningful edge case ('filas' empty when the process publishes no CUI, site shows 'Sin informacion'), but says nothing about read-only nature, network/scraping failure behavior, or auth/rate constraints.

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 Args/Devuelve structure is compact and front-loaded, with purpose stated before parameters and return value. No filler sentences; slightly terse but every line carries information.

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 2-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the input dependency chain and the returned dict plus its edge case, which is enough to call it correctly. It could still say more about failure modes, but nothing essential to invocation 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% (bare 'Ses' and 'Index' titles), so the description must compensate and largely does: ses is the session returned by buscar_procesos, and index is the 0-based global row index of that search result. That is exactly the semantic context the schema lacks.

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 states a specific verb and resource: retrieving the SNIP/CUI codes tied to a process from the 'Codigos' popup, scoped by a search session and row index. It distinguishes itself from the broad buscar_procesos family by being the popup-level detail fetch. It stops short of naming a sibling it is not, which keeps it from a 5.

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 implies a required two-step flow by defining ses as 'sesion devuelta por buscar_procesos' and index as the row index of that search, which effectively tells the agent this must follow a search. However, it never states when to prefer this over sibling detail tools like ficha_proceso or historial_proceso, nor any exclusions.

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