cercar_retribucions_alts_carrecs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It warns that 'retribucio_anual_prevista' is text and sorting may not be numeric, which is a helpful data quality disclosure. However, it does not discuss authentication, rate limits, performance implications, or data freshness.

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 concise: two paragraphs with clear information. The first paragraph states the purpose and output fields, the second adds usage and a note. No unnecessary sentences.

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 7 parameters, no required ones, and an output schema (context signals), the description adequately covers the main use cases, return fields, and a notable data quality issue. It could mention pagination handling (limit/offset) but the schema covers that. Overall, appropriate completeness.

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% with descriptive parameter descriptions (e.g., 'Denominació del càrrec (ex: "President")'). The description adds usage hints for 'carrec' and 'nom' but not for other parameters like 'cerca_lliure' or 'vinculacio'. The added value over the schema is modest, justifying a baseline of 3.

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 searches for nominal retributions of high-ranking officials (alts càrrecs) of the Generalitat, listing returned fields and example positions. It distinguishes itself by focusing on retribucions of alts càrrecs, but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'cercar_directius_sector_public' or 'cercar_retribucions_subvencionats'.

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 provides basic usage guidance: use 'carrec' for searching by position and 'nom' for searching by person name. However, it lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings, and 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.