declaration_paiement

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose real behavior: it proposes an accounting entry, triggers a next action, includes a commercial reminder in plan Agent, and has no bank access. It does not specify persistence or reversibility, but the disclosed workflow is materially useful.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: trigger, ordering, workflow, constraint, parameter rule, side-effect reminder, and endpoint. The key use case is front-loaded in caps, making it scannable despite the dense single paragraph.

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 7-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers trigger, ordering, data source choice, output proposal, and REST route. It could add expected response format or side-effect confirmation, but the essential calling context is present.

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?

Input schema already documents all 7 parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by linking source=extrait_bancaire to a concrete condition and mapping the client-confirmed date + montant to inputs.

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?

Description names the exact trigger (client says a rent was paid), the resource/endpoint (POST /api/v1/gerance/declaration-paiement), and the goal (trace the encaissement). It also distinguishes itself from sibling quittance_loyer by stating it must be called before it.

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 explicit when-to-use ('QUAND le client vous dit qu'un loyer a été payé'), sequencing relative to quittance_loyer, and a conditional routing rule ('Si extrait bancaire : source=extrait_bancaire'). It also sketches the resulting next action (quittance if complete, otherwise reçu).

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