declaration_urssaf

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It describes the tool as preparing and calculating, implying a non-destructive operation. However, it does not disclose side effects, authentication needs, or what happens with the provided steps (e.g., external link). Some transparency exists but is incomplete.

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 concise sentences that front-load the main purpose and then add a secondary detail (providing steps). Every word is meaningful with no redundancy or fluff.

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 complexity (8 parameters, no output schema), the description is somewhat incomplete. It mentions providing steps but does not specify the output format or what exactly is returned. The calculation logic is implied but not detailed. Adequate for a basic tool but leaves room for ambiguity.

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% with all 8 parameters having descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond enumerating what the tool does. Baseline of 3 applies as the schema already documents parameters adequately.

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 prepares the quarterly URSSAF declaration for auto-entrepreneurs, calculates contributions, and provides steps. It uses a specific verb ('prépare') and resource ('déclaration trimestrielle URSSAF'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like calculer_charges_ae or simuler_impots.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or specific contexts. Sibling tools like calculer_charges_ae could be confused, but no differentiation is provided.

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