modeles_devis

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact — that the `devis:write` permission is required — but never states whether this is a read-only listing, how many results to expect, or whether the templates are user-scoped. The write-permission disclosure is worth credit but leaves the operation's nature ambiguous.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the resource and the permission constraint. Nothing is wasted, though the parenthetical permission sits awkwardly mid-sentence.

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 one-optional-parameter listing tool this covers the resource, its fields, and the permission, and the absence of an output schema is mitigated by the enumerated fields. The undocumented `dossier` parameter is the notable gap.

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% and the single parameter `dossier` is never mentioned in the description. An agent cannot tell whether it filters templates by a specific job/folder or what happens when it is omitted (the schema only shows default null).

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 names the resource (quote templates for the tradesperson) and enumerates the fields each template carries (numéro, nom, objet, variables), and explicitly links it to the sibling `devis_depuis_modele`. It is clear this is the catalogue that feeds that tool, though the verb (list/retrieve) is only implied.

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?

By saying the variables are 'to fill in for devis_depuis_modele', it implies you consult this tool before calling the template-filling tool. It does not state exclusions, prerequisites beyond the permission, or what to do if no templates exist.

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