add_expense_report_line

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Add an expense line' without mentioning side effects (e.g., does it update totals?), prerequisites (parent expense report must exist), or error behavior. This is insufficient for a write operation.

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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is straightforward, and the schema thoroughly documents parameters, but the description lacks usage guidance and behavioral context (e.g., no output schema, no prerequisites, no return value details). It is minimally viable but not enriched.

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 schema description coverage is high (88%), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, but it does not need to compensate.

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 action (ajouter = add) and the resource (ligne de dépense à une note de frais = expense line to an expense report). It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_invoice_line or add_proposal_line by specifying the expense report context.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites (e.g., an existing expense report must be created first). The description only states the action without contextual direction.

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