cout_foncier

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

Annotations indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and open-world. The description adds valuable context: the data source (DGFiP DVF), that it covers only residential properties, and the proxy warning for commercial use. No contradictions with annotations.

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 fairly concise given the amount of information, but it could be slightly more streamlined. It front-loads the main output and uses clear language.

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?

With an output schema existing, the description explains what data is returned (median, quartiles, volume, period) and provides caveats. For a simple query tool with few parameters, this is complete and sufficient.

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 100% with descriptions for lat, lon, and rayon_km. The description mentions 'point + rayon' but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 per rules for high coverage.

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 the tool returns median price per m² for residential built properties, including quartiles, sales volume, and period. It specifies the source (DGFiP DVF) and distinguishes itself from siblings focused on health, demographics, etc.

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 gives explicit guidance: it's for residential land costs only, for professional premises it's a proxy, and it should NOT be integrated into an attractiveness note because installation cost is distinct from market potential. This tells the agent when and when not to use the tool.

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