Generate Fec

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It reveals that the tool returns the file path and mentions that the fiscal year is computed if necessary, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., file creation/overwrite), authorization needs, or error conditions.

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 three sentences in French, front-loading the core purpose, then providing regulatory context and output info. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 tool with one parameter and no annotations or output schema, the description covers purpose, regulatory context, format, and output. It lacks prerequisites (e.g., existence of fiscal year data) but the mention of automatic calculation mitigates this.

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%, and the description only adds that the year corresponds to the fiscal year. It does not clarify accepted range, format, or what happens if the year cannot be computed, leaving ambiguity given the required parameter.

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 it generates the FEC, a regulatory accounting file, for a fiscal year. It explains the regulatory basis (article A.47 A-1 du LPF) and format (18 columns, TAB separator), distinguishing it from siblings like generate_tax_return.

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 implies usage in a tax control context but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. The phrase 'calculé avant la génération si nécessaire' gives some context but lacks precision.

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