messagerie_creer_dossier

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false, so the mutating, non-idempotent nature is covered. The description adds only the word 'personnel', and says nothing about duplicate-name behavior, whether nesting under parent_id is allowed, or response/permission requirements. For a create mutation the disclosure is thin.

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, front-loaded sentence with no waste. It earns its place but is minimalist rather than rich.

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 two-parameter create tool with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient to call it correctly. However, it leaves naming rules, parent-folder semantics and error behavior entirely unaddressed.

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 description contains no parameter information at all, and schema description coverage is only 50% (nom is undocumented). This is weaker than the MID calibration where the description at least enumerated fields, so it does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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 ('Crée') and resource ('un dossier personnel dans la messagerie'), so the agent knows exactly what is produced. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like messagerie_dossiers or messagerie_deplacer, but the create action is unambiguous.

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 indication of when to use this vs messagerie_dossiers (which presumably lists folders) or prerequisites such as needing an existing parent. The agent must infer all usage context. No alternatives or exclusions are named.

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