Résoudre une entreprise française

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the search is free and returns distributable candidates with their official source, but says nothing about rate limits, authentication, pagination, error behavior, or how the result set is bounded by the limit parameter.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and the accepted identifiers. It is efficient and free of filler, though its extreme brevity borders on under-specification for a 7-parameter tool.

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 7 parameters, zero schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is not complete enough. It omits parameter guidance, return shape, pagination, and distinctions from sibling resolution or snapshot tools.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for all 7 parameters. It mentions name, address, SIREN, and SIRET as query inputs, but does not explain limit, commune, postal_code, activity_code, or director_name, nor how the separate address parameter relates to address-in-query usage.

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 verb ('Recherche') and resource ('entreprise française'), and mentions the accepted identifiers (dénomination, adresse, SIREN, SIRET). It distinguishes itself as a free resolution/search tool rather than a snapshot or report, but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like get_company_snapshot.

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 usage context by calling the search 'gratuite' and listing accepted input types, but gives no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool guidance. An agent can infer it is a first-step resolution tool, but alternatives are not named.

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