pennylane_create_quote

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the precondition that at least one line is required, which is a useful behavioral constraint not enforced by the schema, but it does not disclose permissions, side effects, or response behavior beyond that.

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 two short sentences with no filler. It is front-loaded with the core action and then states the minimum required inputs, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 rich schema (100% parameter descriptions), annotations covering safety, and an output schema, the description is largely sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool. It states the purpose and required preconditions, though it omits guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings.

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 100%, so all nine parameters are documented in the schema itself. The description only restates the required parameters and adds no syntax, format, or default-value semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Crée un nouveau devis' (creates a new quote). It clearly distinguishes creating a new quote from updating an existing one via the word 'nouveau', but it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like pennylane_update_quote or pennylane_list_quotes.

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 only lists required inputs (customer, date, deadline, at least one line) rather than when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no explicit guidance on when a new quote should be created instead of using pennylane_update_quote or other quote-related tools.

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