list_exceptional_discounts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries all behavioral burden. It only states the core function and gives no details about read-only safety, return format, pagination, filtering, or error conditions. 'List' implies a read operation, but this is not disclosed.

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, short sentence in French that directly states the action and target. No extraneous words or repetition of schema information.

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 a simple single-parameter list tool, the description conveys the basic purpose, but with no output schema and no behavioral details (e.g., whether it returns empty lists, how records are sorted), the agent is left with some ambiguity. Adequate but not rich.

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 documents thirdparty_id as 'ID du client' with 100% coverage. The description's 'pour un client' merely echoes this, adding no new semantic detail about formats, constraints, or behavior.

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 uses a specific verb 'Lister' (list) and identifies the resource as 'avoirs/remises exceptionnelles' (exceptional credits/discounts) for a customer. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_thirdparty_discount by specifying 'exceptionnelles'.

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 implies the tool is used to fetch exceptional discounts for a given customer, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives such as get_thirdparty_discount or list_invoices. No exclusions or alternative conditions are provided.

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