french_energy_open_data_get_eco2mix_latest

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It conveys a read-only 'fetch' behavior and scopes the data nationally from ODRE OpenDataSoft, which is useful context. It does not disclose defaults, output shape, or any limitations such as time/geographic filters, but for a simple read operation this is acceptable.

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 a single, well-formed sentence with every word earning its place. It is front-loaded with the verb and conveys the essential resource and source without any filler.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is close to viable: it states what is fetched and the operative resource. However, it omits any guidance on the default limit and does not distinguish itself from the sibling fetch/search tools, so an agent operating only on the description might use it even when another tool is better suited.

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 single limit parameter is not described in the description, but the schema provides a meaningful name, default, minimum, and maximum. The description's reference to 'rows' gives enough context to infer that limit controls how many recent rows are returned. More explicit phrasing would help, but this is not a large coverage gap.

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 action, resource, and data source: 'Fetch recent national éCO2mix rows from ODRE OpenDataSoft.' This is specific enough to distinguish it from siblings like get_sources or search_odre_catalog, which target other tasks.

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 gives no guidance on when to prefer this tool over the sibling tools, and it does not mention alternatives or exclusions. The intended use is inferable from the name and description, but that is not explicitly stated.

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