obtener_categorias

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. 'Lista' clearly signals a read-only listing operation with no side effects, but the description does not explicitly state read-only behavior, data source, or any ordering/completeness guarantees. For a simple zero-parameter list tool this is adequate though minimal.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with parenthetical examples that add value without redundancy. Every word contributes to clarifying the tool's purpose.

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 parameterless taxonomy-listing tool with an output schema available, the description is complete. It states the subject matter and gives examples of the categories, and nothing else is needed to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema has 100% coverage by virtue of having an empty properties object. There is no parameter detail to add, so the baseline of 4 applies; the description reasonably focuses on the returned concept rather than parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Lista') and a clear resource ('categorías de contratación') with concrete examples ('bienes, servicios, obras, consultorías...'). It clearly identifies what the tool returns and differentiates it from related taxonomy tools like obtener_modalidades or obtener_parametros.

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?

The description implies usage: call this when you need the list of procurement categories. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as obtener_modalidades or buscar_catalogo, and no exclusions or alternative routing are provided.

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