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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: pagination rules (limit default 10, max 30), cursor semantics (next_cursor), and the guarantee that text is never truncated. Doesn't describe error behavior or what happens with an invalid version_id.

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?

Dense but front-loaded: ordering (newest to oldest), the key semantic (state BEFORE modification), the field list, pagination rules, and the usage purpose. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

Three optional params, no output schema, but the description compensates by describing the returned field structure (version_id, date, taille, instructions entières) and the pagination contract. Complete enough for an agent to call correctly and interpret the result.

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 value beyond the schema by explaining cursor usage ('cursor = next_cursor de la page précédente') and the single-version retrieval mode ('Avec version_id, renvoie cette seule version'), which clarifies the mutual-exclusion semantics between pagination and version_id lookup.

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+resource (list versions of Kord configuration) and adds a non-obvious semantic precision: each version is the state of AVANT une modification, and each entry contains the full text. Distinguishes itself clearly from siblings like ficiel_get_agent_config.

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?

Explicitly names the alternative action it precedes: 'Sert à retrouver un état antérieur avant ficiel_restore_agent_config_version.' This tells the agent exactly when to use this tool versus the restore sibling.

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