turnos_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose a key limitation: the tool does not reserve or confirm appointments. However, it lacks details on what kind of information is returned, whether it uses live data, or any side effects. The single sentence adds some context beyond the name but is not rich.

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 front-loads the purpose and includes a limiting clause. Every word earns its place; there is no redundant or filler content.

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 informational tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides a minimal viable explanation: it informs about appointments without booking. However, it omits guidance on the query parameter and what constitutes a successful response, leaving some gaps for an agent to infer.

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 zero description coverage for the 'consulta' parameter, and the description text does not mention it. The param name 'consulta' (query) hints at a free-text question, but the agent receives no guidance on how to format or use it. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 uses a specific verb ('orientar') and resource ('turnos/atención'), and clearly differentiates from siblings by stating it does not reserve or confirm appointments. This distinguishes it from other info tools like reclamos_info, pagos_info, and tramites_info by topic and 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 clearly implies when to use this tool: for information about appointments (turnos), and explicitly excludes reservation/confirmation use cases. It does not name specific alternative tools, but the context of sibling info tools makes the usage context clear, and the 'no reserva ni confirma' phrase acts as a when-not guideline.

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