cercar_retribucions_subvencionats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states what the tool returns but does not disclose if it is read-only, authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects. Basic behavioral info is present but minimal.

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 sentences) and front-loaded with the primary purpose. Every word adds value, with no redundancy.

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 5 parameters and an output schema, the description covers the tool's core function and return fields. It could mention pagination or how to use filter parameters like carrec or empresa, but overall it is sufficient for understanding.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already well-documented in the input schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, earning a baseline score 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 retributions of directors of entities receiving subsidies >10,000€ and lists the returned fields (entitat, càrrec, retribucions anuals, objecte de la subvenció). This distinguishes it from siblings like cercar_retribucions_alts_carrecs (high-ranking officials) and cercar_subvencions (subsidies).

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 finding retributions of directors of highly subsidized entities but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives among siblings.

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