recap_tva

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It mentions the required accounting permission, the date format (AAAA-MM-JJ), and the returned fields. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, but the word 'summary' implies it, and the permission note adds important context.

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 containing all key information: purpose, date format, outputs, and permission. 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?

For a simple summary tool, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, the inputs' format, required permission, and the output fields. Without an output schema, this is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's functionality, though it could optionally state whether the summary is global or filtered.

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 no descriptions, so the description compensates by indicating the parameters define a period and specifying the date format. However, it does not explicitly map debut and fin to start and end dates, leaving some inference to the agent.

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 produces a VAT summary for a date range, listing the specific computed values (collected, deductible, net VAT). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like factures or depenses by focusing on aggregated VAT reporting.

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 intended use is implied by the description: obtain a VAT summary for a period. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool instead of alternatives or any exclusions, such as if a per-client breakdown is needed.

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