documents_telecharger

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint; the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the return is base64-encoded and the document is capped at 10 MB. This directly informs how the agent should handle the payload, which the annotations do not cover.

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 front-loaded sentence that states action, resource, encoding, and limit with zero filler.

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?

With no output schema the description usefully discloses the base64 form and 10 MB ceiling, but it omits error behavior (missing/oversized document) and the id's origin, leaving gaps for an agent to call it reliably.

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% for the single 'id' parameter, so the schema gives no hint about what identifies a document. The description mentions 'un document' but never clarifies the id's form or where to obtain it, leaving the one required parameter effectively undocumented.

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 document de l'espace documentaire'), and the qualifier 'espace documentaire' scopes it apart from the messaging/casier download siblings. It does not explicitly name those alternatives, but the resource is clear enough to distinguish from documents_deposer and documents_lister.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite (e.g. obtaining the id from documents_lister), and no routing against messagerie_telecharger_piece_jointe or casier_telecharger. The purpose is implied but the agent is left to infer selection.

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