turnos_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It discloses the non-transactional nature of the tool, but gives no further detail on response format, data sources, or any other behavioral traits. This is minimal but not misleading.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the purpose and a key exclusion. Every word earns its place, with no unnecessary detail.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description provides essential purpose and a key limitation. However, without an output schema, the lack of detail about what 'orientar' actually returns leaves ambiguity about the tool's response.

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 schema has one parameter 'consulta' with 0% description coverage. The tool description does not explain what the parameter should contain, its format, or provide examples, leaving the agent to infer from the parameter name alone.

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 function: 'Orientar sobre turnos/atención' (guide about appointments/attention). It explicitly excludes actions ('no reserva ni confirma turnos'), distinguishing it from potential booking tools and clarifying its informational scope.

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 use when a user needs orientation about appointments and attention, and explicitly states what the tool does not do (reserve or confirm). However, it does not name alternative tools or provide explicit when-not-to-use scenarios beyond the reservation/confirmation exclusion.

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