local_risk_france_list_reference_items

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only says 'when available', implying variability but without specifying what happens if unavailable, whether it's a read operation, or what kind of data it returns. For a tool that lists items, this is insufficient.

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 compact sentence that states the tool's function without fluff. It is appropriately sized for a zero-parameter tool, though it could be slightly more explicit about the output.

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 the simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks detail on what 'reference items' specifically are, which could confuse an agent. It doesn't explain additional context like whether these are static or dynamic, but for a simple listing tool it's acceptable.

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 manageable by the schema. Since there are no parameters, there is nothing for the description to add beyond what the schema shows. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description doesn't mislead.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'built-in reference items for this MCP', which distinguishes it from sibling tools that fetch external data. However, 'when available' introduces ambiguity about whether it always returns something, slightly reducing clarity.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_sources or search_data_gouv. It simply states its purpose without context or exclusions.

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