add_intervention_line

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It merely says 'Ajouter' without mentioning that it mutates the intervention, whether it requires an existing intervention, or what the response looks like. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is concise, though it could have included a short clause with usage guidance without becoming verbose.

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 an 8-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, this description is drastically under-specified. It lacks any behavioral details, prerequisites, return information, or relation to the intervention lifecycle, making it inadequate for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 already describes 8 parameters with 88% coverage, including units and examples, so the description isn't required to add parameter details. The phrase 'ligne de temps' hints at the temporal nature (duree, qty), but no extra meaning is added beyond the schema.

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') and the resource ('une ligne de temps à une fiche d'intervention'), distinguishing it from other line-add tools by targeting interventions. However, it doesn't elaborate on what a 'ligne de temps' specifically entails beyond the name.

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, what prerequisites exist (e.g., the intervention must already exist), or any alternatives. The description only states the action, leaving the agent to infer context from the tool name and schema.

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