search_permits

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that certain filters have quota costs and are reserved for higher plans, which is good. However, it lacks details on pagination, error responses, or rate limits, and doesn't clarify that 'page' implies no offset parameter (only limit).

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose. The first sentence lists filters efficiently. Could be structured with bullet points for readability, but overall 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?

Given 14 complex parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, description covers plan tiers, cost implications, and return type ('page de permits'). Missing details: pagination mechanism, return field list, error handling, and rate limits. However, sibling tools like get_permit_details fill the gap for detailed views, making this adequate for a search endpoint.

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 86% (12 of 14 params have descriptions), so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond schema: it states 'filtres combinables' and 'infos de base', but doesn't elaborate on parameter usage or constraints beyond what's in 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?

Description clearly states it searches for French building permits with combinable filters and returns basic info. The verb 'Recherche' and resource 'permis de construire' are specific. While it distinguishes from siblings like get_permit_details by its listing nature, it doesn't explicitly contrast with them.

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?

Description implies usage for filtered searches but provides no explicit when-to-use or alternatives. It mentions plan restrictions (e.g., 'Free OK', 'réservé aux plans Pro+') which gives some context, but no guidance on when to choose this over sibling tools like bulk_enrich_list or find_dvf_neighbors.

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