chantiers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that this is a read-only list operation and mentions filtering by status. It does not detail return format or side effects, but for a simple list tool, this is minimally sufficient.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the action and the optional filter. 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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description covers the core list functionality and filter option, but the ellipsis ('…') does not enumerate all possible statuses, leaving the agent to guess the full set. It is adequate but has gaps.

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 schema provides a single 'statut' parameter with no description and no enum values. The description adds meaning by giving example values ('en_cours, termine…') and indicating the filter is optional ('éventuellement'), which helps the agent understand expected values and behavior.

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 lists 'chantiers' (construction sites) with an optional status filter, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'marge_chantier' (margin calculation) and 'clients' (client list) by focusing on the chantier entity.

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 implies usage: call this to list chantiers, optionally filtered by status. It does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives or provide exclusions. However, the context is clear enough for a simple list tool.

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