Ma fiche produit

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one real behavioral trait: 'Hors quota' (the read does not consume the user's quota). It does not say what is returned when the profile is empty or the sheet is unwritten beyond the conditional 'si elle est rédigée', nor whether results are cached or refreshable.

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?

Two compact sentences plus the quota note; the parenthetical inventory is dense but each item earns its place by telling the agent what evidence is available. The when-to-use instruction sits at the end rather than the front, slightly weakening front-loading.

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 must explain the return shape, and it does so reasonably via the field inventory. Gaps remain around empty-state behavior and whether the data is a snapshot or live, which matters for a zero-argument context tool an agent is told to read before acting.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline applies. The field list it does provide describes payload contents rather than inputs, which is useful but not a parameter concern.

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 enumerates the exact resource being returned (onboarding answers: objectives, @TikTok, what the user sells, link, who films, target views, blockers, plus the written product sheet) so an agent knows precisely what it gets. It lacks an explicit verb ('retrieve/read') and does not distinguish the resource from the nearby 'qui_suis_je', which plausibly returns overlapping identity data.

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?

'À lire avant de proposer des contenus' gives a clear trigger condition, which is exactly the context an agent needs to call it pre-generation. There are no explicit exclusions or named alternatives, and no guidance on whether to re-read within a session.

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