generate_relance_impayeGenerate an unpaid-rent reminder letter. Fields: landlord_name, tenant_name, property_address, amount_due, period. FR: relance / mise en demeure loyer impaye. Renvoie un lien a ouvrir pour afficher/telecharger le PDF.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| payload | Yes | Objet contenant les champs du document (voir la description du tool). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It discloses a key behavior: 'Renvoie un lien a ouvrir pour afficher/telecharger le PDF' (returns a link to open/download the PDF). However, it does not mention any side effects, permissions, or whether the document is stored. This is partial but useful.
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 succinct sentences, immediately front-loaded with the main purpose. It includes a field list, a French note, and the return behavior without unnecessary elaboration.
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 document generation tool with an opaque payload schema, the description provides essential field names and the return link behavior. However, it omits field formats (e.g., date/currency), required vs. optional status, and any additional processing details, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.
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 schema only defines a generic 'payload' object with no child properties, so the description compensates by listing the actual fields: landlord_name, tenant_name, property_address, amount_due, period. This adds meaning beyond the schema, though it lacks types/formats for those fields.
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 'Generate an unpaid-rent reminder letter' with a specific verb and resource, and the title adds 'PDF'. This uniquely identifies the tool among siblings like generate_quittance or generate_conge, which serve different document types.
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?
Usage context is implied by 'unpaid-rent reminder' (use when a tenant has failed to pay rent), but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this vs. alternative tools, nor any mention of prerequisites or exclusions. The sibling list is not referenced.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools are clearly distinct document generators or calculators, but check_rent_control and get_reference_rent both deal with rent control and could be confused, as could simulate_irl and simulate_irl_by_quarters. Descriptions mostly clarify boundaries, so only minor ambiguity exists.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., generate_quittance, check_address_risks, simulate_irl). The verbs vary by action but the structure is uniform and predictable across the entire set.
With 21 tools covering a broad but focused domain of French rental law, the count is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range but each tool serves a distinct legal or calculation purpose. The scope is large but justified for a comprehensive rental toolkit.
The toolset covers the full lifecycle of a French residential lease: creation, amendments, termination, deposits, guarantors, inventories, rent receipts, unpaid rent, rent control, and rent revision. There are no obvious missing operations for the stated purpose.