get_mdb_score

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It describes the output (score, tier, breakdown) but does not disclose side effects, prerequisites (beyond plan), error conditions, or whether the operation is read-only. The description gives moderate behavioral context but lacks completeness.

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 one concise sentence, front-loaded with the main action and output. It avoids redundancy but could be slightly better structured with separate lines for output and condition.

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?

Given no output schema and one parameter, the description provides key output details but omits what the '7 signaux' are, how errors are handled, and any dependencies (e.g., permit must exist). It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions the parameter is for a permit ('pour un permis') but does not explain the parameter name (num_pa), format, or example. Minimal additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool calculates a specific score (Score Opportunité Marchand de Biens v0.1) for a permit, with output details (0-100, tier, breakdown). It also identifies the plan restriction, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_permit_details or search_permits.

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 explicitly states 'Plan Pro+ uniquement', providing a clear condition for use. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives, though the plan restriction itself guides appropriate usage.

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