Documentation du serveur AE

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only lists content categories and does not state what the tool actually returns (e.g., a formatted text document, a list, a single topic page), whether it has side effects, or any restrictions. For a help tool, it likely has no side effects, but that is not disclosed, leaving a significant gap.

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 sentence that front-loads the key content types and has no redundant words. It is concise and efficiently communicates the purpose without waste.

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 description lists content areas and the schema explains parameters, but it does not clarify the exact output format or how 'search' interacts with 'topic'. Since there is no output schema, the description should provide more about the return value. It is adequate for a simple help tool but has gaps around the actual behavior.

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 100%: both 'topic' and 'search' are described in the schema, and the enum values align with the content categories listed in the description. The description adds a little context by enumerating those categories but does not add syntax or format details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific resource: a reference for kernel commands, property paths, matchNames, easing curves, expressions, shape types, and text animators. The title 'Documentation du serveur AE' reinforces that it provides documentation. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that perform actions (ae_run, ae_shape, etc.), though it could be more explicit that it returns documentation content.

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 the tool is for retrieving reference documentation, which is distinct from the task-oriented siblings. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor any mention of when not to use it. The context is clear but not explicitly stated.

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