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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint, so the trailing 'Lecture seule' is redundant. However, the description adds a real operational constraint the annotations do not cover — a 100-identifier batch cap — and states what the call returns (current price/availability), which is useful pre-call 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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the batch-lookup action and followed by the usage trigger and constraint — no wasted clauses. The final 'Lecture seule' restates the annotation and is the one line that does not earn its place.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description only gestures at the response ('prix/disponibilité') without indicating shape. For a batch tool it also omits important behavior: what happens when some IDs are unknown, and how the localization context affects returned prices. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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?

With 50% schema coverage, the description does meaningful work: it explains that 'ids' holds product/variant identifiers and supplies a maximum of 100, which the schema does not encode via maxItems. The nested 'context' object (currency/language/address_country) is left entirely to the schema, so it is not fully additive.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with explicit batch scope: 'Récupère plusieurs produits par identifiants en un seul appel (lot)'. This implicitly separates it from search_catalog (which finds IDs) and get_product (single item), though neither sibling is named explicitly.

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?

'À utiliser lorsque vous disposez DÉJÀ des identifiants' gives a clear positive trigger that implicitly excludes search-style discovery, and 'souhaitez leur prix/disponibilité actuels' names the goal. No explicit 'do not use when' clause or named alternative, so it stops short of a 5.

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