Mettre à jour un ticket

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses notification behavior and plugin dependency, but omits details on permissions, reversibility, or whether updates affect only specified fields. This is acceptable but not comprehensive for a mutation tool with 10 parameters.

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?

Description is three focused sentences: function, critical ID retrieval advice, then notification and plugin note. It is front-loaded and concise without extraneous words. Minor improvement would be to place plugin requirement earlier, but overall efficient.

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 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the core purpose and a key prerequisite but lacks details on update behavior (partial updates, state dependencies, error conditions). It is adequate but not complete for complex usage.

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 covers all 10 parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by grouping fields and emphasizing ID retrieval from referential, but does not provide syntax or format details beyond the schema. At 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3, and the description adds marginal extra context.

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 updates ticket fields like category, subcategory, priority, etc. It mentions the need to retrieve IDs via a sibling tool, which adds specificity. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from similar update tools like assign_ticket or set_ticket_state, though the sibling list aids inference.

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 provides explicit guidance: 'IDs must be retrieved from gestsup_list_referential — never guessed'. It also mentions notification behavior and plugin requirement. However, it lacks when-to-use vs alternatives such as assign_ticket or set_ticket_state, and does not state prerequisites like ticket state.

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