Statistiques de la queue

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. While 'Affiche' (displays) implies a read-only operation, it doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, what format the statistics are returned in, if there are rate limits, or if the data is real-time versus cached. For a stats tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 single, efficient sentence that gets straight to the point with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and appropriately sized for a no-parameter tool that displays statistics.

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 stats-display tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'detailed statistics' includes, the format of the output, whether this is a real-time snapshot, or any behavioral characteristics. Given the complexity of queue statistics and lack of structured documentation, more context is needed.

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 tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents the absence of inputs. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist, maintaining focus on what the tool does rather than what it accepts.

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 ('Affiche' - displays/shows) and the resource ('statistiques détaillées de la queue de tâches' - detailed statistics of the task queue), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'task_queue' or 'pool_stats', but the specificity of 'detailed statistics' provides some implicit distinction.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'task_queue' or 'pool_stats'. There's no mention of prerequisites, timing considerations, or comparative context with other queue/task-related tools in the sibling list.

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