devis_depuis_modele

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

With no annotations, the description carries the load and does well: it discloses the permission needed, that the result is a DRAFT, and that nothing is sent automatically (the artisan reviews and sends in VoxFactura). It omits failure behavior (unknown template, missing variables) and what identifier is returned.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and draft status, then parameter-by-parameter notes with no filler. Dense but every clause carries information; only the unmentioned `dossier` is a gap rather than verbosity.

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?

No annotations and no output schema, but the description covers purpose, permission, the non-auto-send guarantee, and 3 of 4 parameters. An agent can call it correctly; the missing `dossier` semantics and return value are the remaining holes.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate and largely does: `modele` (name or number, cross-referenced to `modeles_devis`), `variables` (value keyed by variable name, dates as AAAA-MM-JJ), and `client_id` (account client number, else the template's). The `dossier` parameter is never mentioned.

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 and resource ('Crée un devis en BROUILLON depuis un modèle de devis'), including the draft-state qualifier that separates it from a from-scratch creation. It does not explicitly name the sibling creer_devis_brouillon, so differentiation is implied by 'depuis un modèle' rather than stated.

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?

Routes the agent to `modeles_devis` to resolve the template name/number, and states the required permission (devis:write). It gives clear usage context but no explicit when-not/exclusion guidance.

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