casier_telecharger

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description usefully adds two behavioral facts beyond the annotations: the payload is returned as base64 and is capped at 10 Mo, which directly affects how the agent must handle the result and what inputs are viable.

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?

A single short sentence that front-loads the action and appends the two constraints as a parenthetical. Nothing is wasted and nothing important is buried.

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 one-parameter download with no output schema, the description covers the essential contract: what comes back (base64) and the size ceiling. The remaining gap is provenance of the id, but the tool is otherwise complete enough to invoke.

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 sole required parameter 'id' is a bare string with no documentation anywhere. The description never says this id identifies a casier file entry (presumably from casier_lister), leaving the agent to infer it. With one undocumented parameter, the description should compensate but does not.

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?

States a specific verb (télécharge) and resource (un fichier du casier), so the agent immediately knows this is a file-retrieval tool for the casier store. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling documents_telecharger or messagerie_telecharger_piece_jointe, which appear to do similar things for other stores.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus documents_telecharger or how to obtain the required id. The scope (casier rather than documents or messagerie) is only implied by the name and the word 'casier' in the description.

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