facture

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that the response includes line items ('lignes comprises'), but does not address error conditions, required permissions, or response format. This is minimal but not misleading for a simple fetch-by-ID operation.

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, concise sentence. It immediately states the core purpose ('Détail d'une facture'), then adds the essential scope ('lignes comprises') and lookup method ('par son identifiant'). No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 tool's low complexity (one parameter, no nested objects, no output schema), the description adequately covers its main function: retrieving a detailed invoice with lines by ID. Missing error-handling or response-shape details are minor given the simplicity, but a brief note on return structure would improve completeness.

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 has one parameter 'facture_id' with no description (0% coverage). The description's 'par son identifiant' clarifies that this parameter is the invoice identifier, adding meaning beyond the raw schema. However, it does not provide examples or constraints beyond the integer type already in the schema.

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's function: 'Détail d'une facture (lignes comprises) par son identifiant' specifies a detail/get action on the invoice resource, including line items. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'factures' (likely a list) by emphasizing the singular detail aspect and identifier-based lookup.

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 'par son identifiant' implies the tool is used when you have a specific invoice ID and need its full details, distinguishing it from the sibling 'factures' list tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, leaving some room for interpretation.

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