boe_nomenaments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It specifies that the tool extracts section 2A, which is a behavioral detail, but it does not disclose other traits like authentication needs, rate limits, or whether it is read-only. The description is adequate but not thorough.

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 sentences long, front-loaded with the main purpose in the first sentence. The second sentence adds specificity and a use case without unnecessary words.

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 an output schema exists (not shown), the description does not need to explain return values. It concisely covers the tool's scope and use case, though it could briefly mention the output format.

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%, and both parameters ('data' and 'departament') have descriptions in the schema. The description adds context about extracting section 2A but does not provide additional meaning for the parameters beyond what the schema already conveys.

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 that it searches for appointments, cessations, and personnel situations in the BOE, specifically extracting section 2A. It also mentions a specific use case (detecting revolving doors), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like boe_contractes or boe_departaments.

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 the tool is for personnel changes in BOE section 2A and mentions a use case for detecting revolving doors, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide any exclusions.

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