buscar_marcas_patentes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only says 'buscador especializado' without disclosing any behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, pagination details, or whether it is read-only. The agent has no insight beyond the name and parameter schema.

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, well-structured sentence of 20 words that front-loads the purpose. Every word is informative, with no redundancy or filler.

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 that there is no output schema and the tool has 4 parameters, the description does not explain return values, sorting, or pagination behavior. It is minimally complete for a search tool but leaves significant gaps for agent reasoning.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., 'criterio' is already described as name, owner, or class). The description does not elaborate on format or usage hints.

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 is a specialized search engine for the Fourth Section (Trademarks and Patents), including commercial trademarks, invention patents, industrial models, and designs. The name 'buscar_marcas_patentes' directly matches, and it is distinct from sibling tools that search other sections.

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 for trademark/patent searches but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives among many sibling search tools. It does not set boundaries, leaving the agent to infer.

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