Modifier un(e) note de frais

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

The description discloses that only provided fields are modified (partial update), which adds behavioral context beyond the annotations. Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and non-destructive nature. No contradictions.

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 concise with two sentences and a returns line. It is efficient, contains no unnecessary words, and front-loads the main action.

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?

The description covers the core purpose, partial update behavior, and return value. It lacks details on error conditions or permissions, but given the simplicity of an update operation and adequate schema coverage, it is reasonably complete.

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 100%, so each parameter has a description in the schema. The tool description does not add further meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Met à jour' (updates) and the resource 'note de frais' (expense note). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create, delete, get, and search by implying this is for modifying an existing record.

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 indicates that only provided fields are modified, implying a partial update. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusions. The name itself differentiates, but explicit guidance is missing.

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