obtener_enlace_documento

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the action but does not disclose error handling (e.g., invalid ID), permissions needed, or that it is a read-only operation. For a simple tool, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 sentence that front-loads the main action and includes necessary details (Mercado Público, attachment types, document ID). No wasted words, and it 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?

Given the simplicity (1 param, no output schema), the description explains what the tool does but does not clarify the return format (e.g., returns a URL string) or error behavior. It is adequate but missing explicit output details.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning to the parameter beyond what is already in the schema's description. No extra context like validation or format is provided.

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 verb (generates), the resource (official public download link), and the context (for attachments in Mercado Público using document ID). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'descargar_y_leer_documento' which downloads content, not just generating a link.

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 needing a public download link, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like 'descargar_y_leer_documento' or 'consultar_documentos_locales'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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