Servitudes d’utilité publique

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds relevant behavioral details: results can be point, line, or surface; exposes a feature_ref when available; and cites the source. 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 a single paragraph of 4-5 sentences, each adding value: main purpose, definition of SUP, result types and feature_ref, sibling tool reference, and source. No redundancy or unnecessary text.

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 explains the concept of SUP, result types, and the feature_ref for further retrieval. Given an output schema exists, it does not need to detail return values. It covers enough context for an AI agent to use the tool correctly.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for lon and lat, with bounds. The description mentions 'pour un point donné par sa longitude et sa latitude' but adds no new semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 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 tool returns the list of servitudes d'utilité publique near a given point, with associated properties. It specifies result types (point, line, surface) and mentions a feature_ref for further retrieval, distinguishing it from sibling tools.

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 explicitly mentions when to use the tool (for a given point to get SUP) and provides a direct alternative: use gpf_wfs_get_feature_by_id for the exact object. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the guidance is clear.

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