buscar_instructivos

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses return behavior ('Devuelve fragmentos y URLs oficiales') and includes a critical safety guardrail ('no inventar requisitos fuera de los fragmentos'). This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond a bare search operation, though it does not cover aspects like rate limits or pagination.

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 three sentences, each earning its place: what the tool searches, when to use it, and what it returns with a safety instruction. It is front-loaded with the main verb and resource, and contains no filler or repetition.

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 simple one-parameter search tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers purpose, usage scenarios, output format, and a behavioral constraint. It does not mention result count or pagination, but these are minor for this context and the description is otherwise self-contained.

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 no description and 0% schema coverage. The tool name and description make it reasonably clear that 'consulta' is the search query, but the description does not explicitly define expected input format or examples. It partially compensates through context but not fully.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Buscar en índice documental oficial generado desde páginas/PDFs públicos.' It clearly states the tool searches an official document index derived from public pages/PDFs, and the use cases (requisitos, documentación, obras, licencias, tasas, trámites) differentiate it from sibling tools like buscar_noticias or buscar_web_oficial.

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 lists when to use the tool ('Usar para requisitos, documentación, obras, licencias, tasas y trámites'), which is strong contextual guidance. However, it does not mention any exclusions or alternative tools, so it stops short of full decision support.

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