sw_doc_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does not state that this is a read-only query, that it requires an open/active document, or what happens when no document is loaded. The only implicit hint is the word 'activo', which suggests a dependency on current state but never makes it explicit.

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?

A single short sentence that front-loads the returned fields with no padding. It is a noun fragment rather than a complete statement, which slightly weakens the delivery but wastes no 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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description's enumeration of return fields (title, path, type, body count) is genuinely load-bearing. For a zero-parameter getter, this is close to sufficient; only the read-only/active-document precondition is missing.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. No parameter semantics need explaining.

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 Spanish fragment names the resource (documento activo) and enumerates the returned fields (título, ruta, tipo, número de cuerpos), so the agent can infer this is a metadata getter. However, it lacks a verb and offers no differentiation from sibling info tools like sw_mass_properties or sw_list_features, leaving the agent to guess its unique role.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus sw_list_features, sw_bbox, or sw_mass_properties, all of which also inspect the active document. No preconditions (e.g., a document must be open) or exclusions are stated.

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