dossiers

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses an auth constraint ('Clé cabinet seulement') and the workflow ordering as a prerequisite step, but says nothing about result size, pagination, or error behavior when no cabinet key is present.

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 tight sentences, front-loading the credential constraint and the returned fields before the follow-up instruction. The colon-fragment opening is slightly compressed but nothing is wasted.

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 zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, it covers what is returned, what credential is needed, and how to consume the result. Missing only volume/format details that an agent might want before calling.

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 the baseline is 4. The mention of the `dossier` parameter belongs to sibling tools, not this one, and is not misleading here.

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 resource (client dossiers) and enumerates the returned fields (numéro, raison sociale, SIREN), so an agent knows exactly what it gets back. It does not differentiate itself from the sibling `clients`, which an agent could easily confuse with this tool.

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?

Gives clear downstream usage: pass the returned numéro into the `dossier` parameter of other tools or set VOXFACTURA_DOSSIER. It does not state when not to use it or how it differs from `clients`, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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