Lister les tickets d'un demandeur

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions returning an empty list if no tickets, which is helpful, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or side effects. For a read-only tool, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, no extraneous text. Efficiently conveys essential information.

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 tool has moderate complexity with 5 parameters and no output schema. The description covers the core behavior (list by user, sorting, pagination, empty list). It doesn't describe the return format in detail, but the schema already documents parameters. Given the coverage, it is sufficiently 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description repeats 'tri et pagination' which is already covered by parameters (sort, order, page, limit). It adds no new meaning beyond the schema descriptions.

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 lists tickets by user ID with sorting and pagination, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'gestsup_search_tickets' (broader search) and 'gestsup_get_ticket' (single ticket). The verb 'Liste' and resource 'tickets d'un demandeur' are specific.

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 for fetching tickets of a specific user, which is clear from context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., for searching by other criteria) or mention alternatives explicitly, leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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