Datos telematicos del contenedor

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds meaningful behavioral context: 'Fuente: GET /telematicData' indicates the underlying HTTP call, and 'Cache de 12 h' warns that data may be cached for up to 12 hours. This goes beyond what annotations provide and does not contradict them.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The main purpose and data contents are front-loaded, followed by two compact implementation details (source and cache). Every sentence earns its place.

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 zero-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema and read/idempotent annotations, the description is nearly complete: it names the resource, lists key data fields, identifies the source endpoint, and notes the cache duration. The only minor gap is the lack of explicit differentiation from sibling maintenance tools, but that does not impair invocation correctness.

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 has zero parameters and the schema reflects that, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately omits parameter details and instead supplies source and cache information, which is the only relevant invocation context.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Lee el contenedor de mantenimiento completo' and enumerates the included data fields (kilometraje, CBS, bateria de 12V, presiones, estado de sueno). This level of detail distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_maintenance_summary or get_vehicle_status without requiring schema inspection.

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 usage when a full maintenance telematics read is needed and provides useful context (source and cache), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_maintenance_summary or get_tyre_diagnosis. No when-not conditions or alternative routing are given.

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