list_manufacturing_orders

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 only says 'Lister les ordres de fabrication' which implies a read-only list operation, but it doesn't mention pagination, default behavior, or what the response contains. It adds minimal value beyond the tool name and does not inform the agent about any side effects or return format.

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 short, single sentence that is front-loaded and to the point. It earns its place by stating the core purpose, though it could be slightly more detailed. Its brevity is not a flaw, but it lacks supporting context.

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 simplicity (list operation), the description is still incomplete. There is no output schema, and the description does not explain return values, filtering options, or any limitations. For a manufacturing order list, it fails to provide essential context like default ordering or how sqlfilters works.

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 only 33% (only 'status' has a description). The description itself does not explain any of the three parameters (limit, status, sqlfilters) or how they affect the behavior. Since the schema coverage is low, the description was expected to compensate but does not, leaving the agent without parameter 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 clearly states the action (Lister = list) and the resource (ordres de fabrication = manufacturing orders). It's unambiguous and distinguishes itself from other manufacturing order tools like create_ or get_ by indicating a list operation, though it doesn't explicitly mention any scope or filtering capability.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_manufacturing_order or produce_manufacturing_order. There is no mention of typical use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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