Obteniendo contratos en lote

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the 10-item cap, deduplication of duplicate ids, partial-failure semantics (non-numeric ids routed to 'faltas' while the rest still process), and per-element 'ok' flags. It does not mention auth/permission needs or rate limiting, so it is not fully exhaustive.

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?

Uses an Args/Devuelve structure that is front-loaded with the core purpose. Slightly verbose in the returns block, but nearly every clause (cap, dedupe, faltas routing) carries information an agent needs.

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?

There is no output schema, so documenting the return shape is necessary and done here (detalles/faltas/nota with per-element ok). Combined with parameter and failure-mode coverage, the definition is close to complete, though it omits auth/permission preconditions.

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%, so the description must compensate, and it does: 'ids' is explained as a list of numeric id_contrato values with duplicate handling and a cap, and 'maximo' is bounded to 1..10. Both of the two parameters gain meaning beyond the bare JSON 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 operation – batch-fetching contract details in one call – and explicitly contrasts it with the sibling 'detalle_contrato' (avoids repeating it per id). An agent can distinguish this from 'detalle_contrato' and 'buscar_contratos' without opening a schema.

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 an explicit alternative and the condition for choosing it: 'usa detalle_contrato si solo necesitas uno'. It also states the call cap (10 per call) and that duplicates are processed once, which are usage-shaping constraints, not just description.

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