export_accounting_entries

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 does disclose a significant behavior: calculation from invoices when the chart of accounts is uninitialized. However, it omits other relevant details such as requiring date parameters, handling of limits, or the structure of the exported CSV.

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 extremely concise: a single sentence with two clauses. There is no wasted wording. It loses a point because it is terse to the point of underspecification, but as a concise statement, it is well-structured.

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 has no output schema, no annotations, and three parameters. The description only provides a hint about an edge case (uninitialized chart of accounts) but lacks essential context such as the meaning of the date range, the limit parameter, and what the CSV contains. It is incomplete for a tool of this complexity.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description does not mention any parameter. The three parameters (date_start, date_end, limit) are completely unexplained, forcing the agent to guess their meaning and required format.

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: 'Exporter les écritures comptables en CSV' (export accounting entries to CSV), specifying both the resource and the output format. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_accounting_entries, which lists entries but does not mention CSV export.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The mention of 'Calcul depuis les factures si plan comptable non initialisé' provides a condition (calculation from invoices when chart of accounts not initialized) but does not clarify when to choose this over list_accounting_entries or other accounting tools.

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