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

Annotations already cover the read-only, closed-world profile, so the description adds real value by disclosing the inclusion mechanism: items count as new only while the admin's Nouveauté flag is active, for 14 days after arrival. It does not mention ordering (newest first?) or that the list is a subset of the catalog rather than all products.

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?

One sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded, followed by a parenthetical that earns its space by defining the 14-day Nouveauté rule. No filler, though the parenthetical is dense enough that a trailing short clause would have helped readability.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema and read-only annotations, the description covers what the tool returns conceptually and what qualifies an item. The remaining gap is ordering and result-shape expectation, which is minor at this complexity level.

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?

There is a single optional parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already explains 'limit' fully. The description adds nothing about the parameter and does not clarify default or truncation behavior, which is the baseline case for high coverage.

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 ('Lister') and resource ('nouveautés Cadorama') and further defines the resource as products recently added and admin-flagged as Nouveauté for 14 days. That definition makes it distinguishable in substance from get_best_sellers or search_products, though no sibling is named.

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 is only implied: an agent can infer it should call this to browse new catalog items, and the 14-day flag rule hints at the data's freshness window. There is no explicit when-to-use, no exclusion, and no pointer to the closely related get_best_sellers or search_products siblings.

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