detall_subvencio

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 does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, authentication requirements, error handling for invalid codes, or rate limits. The description only states it 'gets details' without behavioral context.

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 with two sentences. The first sentence clearly states the purpose, and the second provides a necessary usage condition. No redundant information.

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?

For a simple retrieval tool with an output schema, the description is fairly complete. It states what it does and the requirement for input. However, it does not mention behavior when both codes are provided or error cases when neither is provided.

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 the schema already describes each parameter. The description adds the constraint 'Cal proporcionar almenys un dels dos codis' (must provide at least one code), which improves parameter semantics beyond the schema descriptions.

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 retrieves full details of a grant using either RAISC or BDNS code. It specifies the resource (subvenció) and action (detall complet), effectively distinguishing it from sibling search tools like 'cercar_subvencions'.

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 states the requirement of providing at least one code, but it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to choose this over 'cercar_subvencions' or 'bdns_detall_convocatoria'). No explicit when-not or alternatives are mentioned.

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