Último número de orden de CPE

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output concept and scoping by sucursal and tipoCPE, but it does not describe edge cases such as behavior with no records or whether only valid CPEs are considered. This is adequate for a simple query but not deeply transparent.

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 two sentences with no filler; the core output is stated first and the use case follows. Every sentence earns its place.

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 low-complexity tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description states the output concept and purpose adequately. It does not detail return format or error behavior, but those are minor for this kind of simple query.

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 100%, so both parameters already have types, defaults, and meaning. The description reinforces that sucursal and tipoCPE scope the result, but it adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly identifies the returned value—the last waybill order number for a branch and CPE type—and its use case of detecting numbering gaps. It lacks an explicit action verb like 'returns' or 'gets,' but the noun phrase is unambiguous and semantically distinct from the sibling 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?

The second sentence gives a concrete use case: 'Sirve para detectar saltos de numeración.' It does not name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to know when to select this tool.

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