governor_evaluate

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It reveals that the tool returns a verdict and that the agent must obey it. It implies a read-only check ('seguridad') but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., logging) or response structure. However, the core behavior is 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 extremely concise, using two short sentences. It front-loads the critical purpose ('Cinturón de seguridad') and immediately gives actionable instructions. No wasted words.

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 tool with 6 parameters (4 required), one enum, and no output schema, the description adequately explains the verdict types and urgency. It lacks return structure specification, which would be helpful given no output schema, but overall it is sufficient.

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 100%, so description adds no parameter-specific value. Baseline 3 is appropriate. The description focuses on usage context rather than parameter details, which is acceptable given the schema already documents all 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: evaluating payments and returning a verdict. It uses a specific metaphor ('Cinturón de seguridad') and distinguishes from siblings like governor_log and governor_reset by its role as a pre-execution check.

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 explicitly instructs to call this tool 'ANTES de ejecutar CUALQUIER operación con dinero' and emphasizes respecting the verdict. It gives clear when-to-use guidance but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives.

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