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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a specific behavioral detail: it signals which documents the OCR can read automatically, which is useful context beyond the annotations.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes the OCR signal. 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 documentation tool with one parameter, the schema covers the parameter, annotations cover safety, and the description explains what it returns (list of documents) and a notable feature (OCR awareness). No output schema is needed, and nothing is missing for correct invocation.

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 input schema already fully describes the parameter (doc_type with enum values and descriptions). The description mentions both types (pré-état daté and état daté) which aligns with the enum, but it doesn't add deeper syntax or format details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema 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?

The description states a specific verb ('Liste') and resource ('les pièces à réunir') with a clear scope (pré-état daté or état daté). It differentiates from siblings because those are about help and tariffs, while this one is about document requirements.

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 makes clear that this tool is for listing required documents, and the sibling tools (aide, tarifs) are obviously different. It doesn't explicitly state 'when not to use', but the context is clear enough that an agent can select it correctly.

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