Lire un bilan structuré DATA INPI

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It confirms a retrieval (read) operation and the ID dependency, but discloses nothing about authentication, rate limits, failure modes when the ID is invalid, or the returned structure — gaps that matter for a read tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

A single, well-formed sentence with zero waste, front-loading the resource before the identifier requirement.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential input dependency but omits the return shape and safety/behavioral context, leaving moderate gaps an agent would otherwise have to discover.

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?

The single parameter has 0% schema coverage (just 'string', 5-200 chars), so the description compensates well by explaining that balance_id is the bilansSaisis identifier produced by get_inpi_attachments, which is the meaning an agent needs to populate it correctly.

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?

States a specific verb (Récupère) and resource (bilan public structuré), and the identifier source pinpoints exactly which balance sheet. It implicitly separates itself from get_inpi_attachments (which supplies the ID) and download_inpi_balance_pdf (unstructured PDF), though the distinction from the PDF variant is only implied by the word 'structuré'.

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 establishes a chained workflow by requiring the bilansSaisis identifier returned by get_inpi_attachments, which tells the agent the prerequisite step. However, it never states when to prefer this over the sibling download_inpi_balance_pdf, so the usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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