entreprise_by_siren

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

Annotations indicate readonly and idempotent behavior. The description goes far beyond by detailing the API call count (1-2), rate limit (~1 req/s), enrichmentStatus modes (success, partial, failed, not_attempted), and the potential truncation of the etablissements list. 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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement, bullet points for return format and enrichmentStatus, and a note about alternatives. It is somewhat lengthy but every sentence adds value. Minor room for trimming.

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?

Given the single parameter, rich output schema (explained in detail), and thorough behavioral coverage (rate limits, limitations, alternatives), the description provides complete context for an AI agent to use the tool effectively.

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 a clear description: 'SIREN exact, 9 chiffres.' The description echoes this but adds no new meaning. Per guidelines, baseline 3 is appropriate when schema already provides full parameter information.

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 retrieves detailed information about a French company by its SIREN number. It explicitly names the data source (DINUM Recherche Entreprises) and differentiates from siblings like 'entreprises_in_radius' and 'etablissement_by_siret'.

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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('pour obtenir le détail d'une entreprise par son SIREN') and when-not-to-use (for exhaustive multi-department enumeration, use 'entreprises_in_radius'). It also explains the behavior when the SIREN is not found, offering clear contexts for different lookupStatus values.

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