Comprobar conexión con Perfex CRM

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 states that the tool verifies the URL responds, which implies a network call, but it does not disclose details such as timeout behavior, expected HTTP status, or authentication requirements. Adequate for a simple health check but not comprehensive.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action ('Verifica que la URL de Perfex responde') and followed by the diagnostic use case. No wasted 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?

For a simple health-check tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and diagnostic context. It does not explain the return format, but that is acceptable given the low complexity and the clear indication that it checks accessibility.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description correctly avoids adding parameter details; the baseline of 4 for zero-parameter tools applies.

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 'Verifica que la URL de Perfex responde' clearly specifies a health-check verb (verifica) and resource (the Perfex URL), distinguishing it from sibling tools that create leads, tickets, or quotes. The title 'Comprobar conexión con Perfex CRM' reinforces the purpose.

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 explicitly states it is 'Útil para diagnosticar si el CRM está accesible', providing clear context for when to use this tool. It does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, but the sibling tools are fundamentally different actions (create/request), so the decision context is clear.

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