obtener_contrato

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It conveys a non-destructive fetch through 'obtiene', and the output scheme covers return shape. It does not disclose auth requirements, error behavior, or any side effects, which is acceptable but minimal for this simple get-by-id.

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?

One sentence with no redundancy; the operation and its key are front-loaded and the sentence earns its place. Appropriate size for a simple tool.

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 the tool's simplicity (one required parameter, output schema present), the description is nearly complete. It does not mention access prerequisites or the meaning of 'firmado' (signed) as a state, but these are minor for a fetch-by-ID tool.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description maps the single parameter to the domain concept 'código de contratación', clarifying that id_contrato is the contracting code rather than any internal ID. No format, example, or value constraints are given, but for a single string ID this is adequate.

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: 'Obtiene los datos de un contrato firmado' (gets signed-contract data). The resource is distinct from sibling tools (proveedor, licitación, adjudicación), and the query key is named ('código de contratación'). Slight lack: does not explicitly mention siblings by name.

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?

No when-to-use guidance or exclusions are provided; the only signal is the verb 'obtiene' implying a lookup. Sibling tools cover related procurement objects, but no routing conditions distinguish them. The usage context is implied, not stated.

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