help

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the advice to call it first, which is a behavioral suggestion but doesn't disclose additional traits like return format or side effects. It adds marginal value beyond the annotations but doesn't contradict them.

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 two concise sentences with no waste. The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the usage instruction in the second. It's efficient and directly to the point.

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 help tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what it does and when to use it. The return (a list of tools with descriptions) is self-explanatory given the name and description. Nothing essential is missing.

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 has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (vacuous). The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description doesn't need to explain parameters since none exist. It correctly omits any parameter details.

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 a specific verb ('Liste' - lists) and resource ('tous les outils disponibles avec leurs descriptions' - all available tools with their descriptions). It also instructs to call this tool first, which clarifies its purpose as an entry point. This distinguishes it from the sibling tools which are all specific operations.

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 description explicitly says 'Appelle cet outil en premier' (call this tool first), providing a clear usage directive. It doesn't mention alternatives or when not to use it, but as a help tool it's self-evidently the initial discovery step. The guidance is sufficient for an agent to know when to invoke it.

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