detalle_fuente

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It indicates a read-only operation ('ver'), but does not mention any potential side effects, error conditions, or additional behavioral nuances. For a simple detail lookup, this is adequate but minimal.

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, clear sentence that conveys the purpose and source of the ID without extraneous words. It is perfectly concise and front-loaded.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: the tool is a detail-view operation for a source, and the ID comes from a specific sibling tool. It lacks information about return format, but the simplicity of the tool makes this acceptable.

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 description adds semantic meaning to the 'id' parameter by specifying it is a public source ID returned by 'buscar_fuentes'. This is valuable context beyond the schema's bare 'string' type and minLength constraint, even though the described coverage is low.

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: view details of a public source by ID. The verb 'Ver' (view) is specific, and the resource 'fuente pública' (public source) is identified. It also distinguishes from sibling tool 'buscar_fuentes' by referencing an ID from that search tool.

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 ties usage to an ID returned by 'buscar_fuentes', providing clear context on when to use this tool (after searching). It implies this is not for searching but for retrieving details, though it does not explicitly exclude other scenarios or name alternatives beyond 'buscar_fuentes'.

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