listar_filtros

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses the return shape ('ok' plus 'valores'), conditional behavior for omitted categoria and required tomo, and the exact-string nature of results. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or mention error behavior, but the listed behavior is clear.

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 description is front-loaded with its purpose and then structured into Args, category explanations, and return values. It is appropriately detailed for a discovery tool, though the tomo requirement is repeated slightly between the Args section and the categoria breakdown.

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?

Given 0% schema description coverage, no output schema, and a two-param tool with conditional behavior, the description is complete. It documents both parameters, the return structure, valid category values, and how the output connects to sibling search tools.

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%, so the description must compensate for both parameters. It fully enumerates valid categoria values, explains the dependency of tomo on categoria='materias', gives an example tomo value, and describes the special summary behavior when categoria is omitted.

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 and resource: listing valid filter values for SPIJ. It also clarifies that returned strings are exactly the values accepted by buscar_normas and buscar_jurisprudencia, so an agent can distinguish this discovery tool from the sibling search tools.

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?

Explains when each categoria is relevant, that tomo is only used with categoria='materias', and that omitting categoria returns a summary. It also gives an alternative path for sectores when a value is missing. However, it does not explicitly frame the overall when-to-use versus when-not-to-use relationship with all siblings.

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