Résumé complet d'équipe

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

Description adds that the tool combines multiple data sources into one call and attempts team resolution via ffbb_resolve_team. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint; description complements without contradiction.

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?

Well-structured bullet points with clear purpose, usage, and alternatives. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 tool's complexity (aggregating multiple data points), strong annotations, full schema coverage, and presence of output schema, the description is complete, covering what it does, when to use it, alternatives, and fallback 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 coverage is 100% with good parameter descriptions. Description does not add significant meaning beyond schema, but explains overall combination logic and fallback, which is acceptable for high coverage.

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 provides a comprehensive team summary combining global bilan, current phase/ranking, last match, and next match in one call. It distinguishes from sibling ffbb_club(action='calendrier') for remaining matches.

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?

Explicitly recommends for quick team overview and provides alternative for remaining matches (ffbb_club). Also mentions fallback to ffbb_resolve_team for ambiguous categories.

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