Rechercher des tickets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes filtering, sorting, and pagination, which are read operations. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or disclose any side effects. The plugin requirement is a useful behavioral note.

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 two sentences, concise and front-loaded with the main action. It includes an important prerequisite without unnecessary verbosity.

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 search/list tool with no output schema, the description covers the input capabilities well. However, it does not describe the return format or structure (e.g., what fields are returned), which would be helpful for completion.

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 the parameters are already documented. The description adds value by emphasizing the technician_id use case and summarizing filter capabilities, but it does not add significant meaning beyond the schema.

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's purpose: 'Recherche/liste des tickets avec filtres' and lists specific filter capabilities. It also highlights a key use case (listing technician tickets). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like gestsup_get_ticket or gestsup_find_tickets_by_user, leaving some ambiguity.

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 mentions a prerequisite (plugin installed and activated) but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when a single ticket is needed vs. a list). The usage context is implied but not explicit.

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