cercar_convocatories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as pagination behavior (limit/offset mention only in schema), search type (exact/fuzzy), read-only nature, or any rate limits. The description only repeats filtering capability and returned fields, which are already partially in the 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 extremely concise: two short sentences. The first immediately states the purpose, and the second lists filters and returned fields. No wasted words, perfectly front-loaded.

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 tool has 8 optional parameters and an output schema, the description is brief but covers the core purpose and mentions returned fields. However, it lacks usage context, behavioral details, and pagination explanation, making it only minimally complete for an agent to use effectively.

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 mentions some filters (any, departament, finalitat, import) but adds little meaning beyond the schema descriptions. However, it lists returned fields (codi, títol, objecte, etc.) which adds value over the schema, as there is an output schema present. Overall, adequate but not exceptional.

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 it searches for grant calls (convocatòries de subvencions) in RAISC, with filters by year, department, purpose, and amount. It lists returned fields, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'bdns_cercar_convocatories' or 'cercar_subvencions', though the RAISC mention provides specificity.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'bdns_cercar_convocatories' for BDNS searches or 'cercar_subvencions' for subsidies). No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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