Skip to main content
Glama

TOISE — intelligence foncière

Dossier JSON pour le mémo Second Avis

toise_memo_second_avis
Read-onlyIdempotent

Préparer le dossier JSON d'un mémo Second Avis à partir d'une fiche adresse déjà analysée. Sortie volumineuse ; pour le .docx, toise_export (document memo_second_avis).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "toise_memo_second_avis"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latNo
lonNo
adresseNo
sectionNo
code_inseeNo
parcelle_idNo
fiche_adresseNoFiche déjà obtenue…
bilan_operationNoRésultat de toise_bilan_operation sur la même…
numero_parcelleNo
surface_bati_m2NoSurface du bien (m²), prioritaire sur la…
prix_demande_eurNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
liensNoLiens vers la fiche TOISE et vers des services de…
quotaNo{ limite, utilise, restant } après décompte d’UNE étude…
curseurNo
dossierYesDossier au format du mémo Second Avis : reference…
partielNotrue : une source n’a pas répondu, des champs manquent…
sourcesYes
has_moreYes
warningsYes
quota_unitesNoUnités d’usage du jour : consommees_par_cet_appel…
avertissementsYesCe que la fiche adresse ne pouvait structurellement pas…
champs_absentsNoDonnées absentes du résultat partiel.
limite_atteinteNoPrésent quand un quota, une limite d’offre ou une fonction…
paiement_requisNoPrésent quand le résultat complet est un achat à l’acte…

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / surface_bati_m2 / description
      Previous value: -"Surface du bien (m²), prioritaire sur la surface…"New value: +"Surface du bien (m²), prioritaire sur la…"
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful behavioral note ('Sortie volumineuse') and the pre-analyzed-input requirement, but says nothing about how partial inputs are handled or how fields from fiche_adresse/bilan_operation are merged.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences with the primary action front-loaded and the alternative deferred to the end; every clause carries information and nothing is redundant.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 11 all-optional parameters, two nested objects and low schema documentation, the description leaves the agent unable to judge a minimally sufficient call. The presence of an output schema excuses it from explaining return values, but not from clarifying which inputs matter.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 27% across 11 parameters with zero required fields, so the description bears much of the burden — yet it only references the 'fiche adresse' input and adds no meaning for the other ten, including the nested bilan_operation and the precedence rules around surface_bati_m2.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The definition names a specific verb ('Préparer') and a specific artifact ('le dossier JSON d'un mémo Second Avis'), plus the required input source ('une fiche adresse déjà analysée'). It also distinguishes itself from toise_export for the .docx variant, though the domain term 'Second Avis' remains unexplained.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It states a prerequisite (an already-analyzed fiche adresse) and routes the agent to the alternative tool (toise_export, document memo_second_avis) when a .docx is wanted. It stops short of saying when this tool should be skipped or which of the many optional inputs to supply.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources