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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does useful work: it discloses the return content (exact procedure IDs) and explains a returned field semantic, `schemaPret: true` meaning guided/anti-rejection mode is available. It stops short of stating auth needs, rate limits, or the full response shape.

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?

Three short sentences, zero filler, and the highest-value instruction ('ALWAYS call this first') is front-loaded immediately after the purpose statement.

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 zero-param, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description covers purpose, call ordering, and one key return field. It does not enumerate the other fields the list returns, so an agent knows the shape only partially.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema has nothing to document and there are no argument semantics to clarify. Baseline of 4 applies for a no-parameter tool.

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 (List) and resource (administrative procedures Tracea supports), and makes its output concrete: procedure IDs and the CERFA form mapping. This clearly separates it from siblings like tracea_check_demarche or tracea_demarche_schema, which operate on a single procedure.

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?

'ALWAYS call this first' gives an explicit sequencing directive with a rationale (so the AI never has to guess which form applies). It is strong on when-to-use, but names no alternative or exclusion condition for cases where listing is not needed.

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