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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses inputs and outputs (new rent, formula, warnings) but does not explicitly state that it is a pure calculation with no side effects or authorization needs. Adequate but could be more explicit.

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 efficiently structured in three sentences: condition, core action, and what it returns. No extraneous 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?

The description fully covers the tool's functionality: it explains the condition, required inputs, and outputs (new rent, formula, legal warnings). No missing information for a calculation tool of this complexity.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context: 'Fournir le loyer actuel et les deux indices IRL (INSEE)' clarifies the role of each parameter beyond the schema descriptions. It also mentions the optional charges parameter.

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 explicitly states the tool's purpose: 'Révision annuelle d'un loyer d'habitation indexée sur l'IRL'. It specifies the triggering condition, inputs, and outputs, clearly distinguishing it from siblings like 'avenant_revision_irl'.

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 sets clear usage context: 'QUAND un bail arrive à sa date anniversaire et que le loyer peut être révisé.' It does not explicitly exclude other scenarios or mention alternative tools, but the context is well-defined.

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