close_intervention

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions closing and invoicing, but does not explain side effects, such as whether an invoice is created, if the intervention status changes irreversibly, or what permissions are required.

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 phrase, 'Clôturer/facturer une fiche d'intervention', with no fluff or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a tool with one parameter, though it could be expanded for clarity.

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 tool's mutating nature and absence of annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits crucial behavioral context, such as whether the tool generates an invoice, whether it can be partially applied, and what the expected outcome is for the intervention record.

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 has one required parameter 'id' of type number, with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not mention this parameter or specify that it is the intervention's ID, leaving the agent to infer its meaning solely from the tool name and context.

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 'Clôturer/facturer une fiche d'intervention' clearly states the action (close/invoice) and the resource (an intervention record). It distinguishes itself from the sibling validate_intervention by adding the billing aspect, making the tool's specific purpose evident.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as whether the intervention must be validated first, nor does it exclude cases where this tool should not be used.

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