chantiers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Liste' implies a read operation, but nothing is said about result size, ordering, pagination, or whether all chantiers are returned by default when no filter is supplied — significant gaps for a list endpoint with zero annotation coverage.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence stating the action before the filter conditions; no filler. The two filters are packed into one trailing parenthetical, which is dense but still readable.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should say more about what comes back and how results are bounded; it says nothing about return shape, ordering, or limits. The parameter gap is partly covered, but the behavioral/return gap is not.

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 0% — the properties are bare 'string'/'integer' with only titles — so the description must compensate, and it does: it enumerates example status values ('en_cours, termine…') and defines client_id as the client number within the account. It stops short of listing all valid statuses or their allowed set.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Liste les chantiers') and the two optional filter dimensions, so the operation is unambiguous. However, it never differentiates itself from the sibling 'chantier' (singular) or 'marge_chantier', leaving the agent to infer that this is the collection-level list versus a detail view.

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 phrase 'éventuellement filtrés par statut... ou par client' implies when the filters apply, so usage is implied rather than stated. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over 'chantier' or 'clients', nor any exclusion or prerequisite.

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