List Loans

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation without side effects. The description adds value by specifying the return fields, which is context beyond the annotations. However, it does not disclose any potential limitations like pagination, sorting, or performance implications. With annotations covering the safety profile, the description provides moderate additional behavioral context.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word adds value: the verb (Liste), the resource (les emprunts immobiliers), the filter (avec filtre optionnel par bien), and the return fields. No superfluous content.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It explains the purpose, filtering option, and return fields. The agent can understand what data to expect. A minor improvement would be to note ordering or pagination, but it's not essential for a list tool of this size. The description does not rely on an output schema, so it adequately covers the result structure.

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 schema has 1 parameter (property_id) with 0% description coverage. The description mentions an 'optional filter by property' but does not explicitly link it to the parameter name. The field name is self-explanatory, so the description partially compensates for the missing schema description. It adds meaning by clarifying the filter is optional, but no format or constraints are given.

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 lists the user's real estate loans with an optional filter by property, and enumerates the returned fields (bank, capital, rate, duration, monthly payment, insurance, start/end dates, total estimated cost). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_loan' (single loan) and 'get_loan_schedule' (amortization schedule).

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 when you need a list of loans, optionally filtered by a property. However, it does not explicitly mention when to avoid using this tool (e.g., when a single loan's details are needed, use 'get_loan' instead) or discuss prerequisites. The guidance is clear but lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives.

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