Rechercher les mandats publics d’un dirigeant

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It does not mention permissions required, rate limits, result format, or what happens if no mandates are found. The hint about birth month improving reliability is useful but limited.

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 concise sentences that front-load the core purpose. It is appropriately sized and easy to parse, though it could be slightly more informative without being verbose.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It should explain return values, parameter semantics, and usage context to compensate for the lack of structured documentation. As is, an agent would struggle to invoke this tool correctly beyond the most basic call.

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%, meaning no parameter descriptions exist in the schema. The description only clarifies the effect of 'date_naissance' (birth month improves matching reliability) but says nothing about 'nom', 'prenoms', or 'max_results'. This leaves three of four parameters semantically unclear, a significant gap given the zero 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 states a clear verb+resource: 'Recherche les sociétés liées à une personne par mandats publics'. This accurately specifies that it searches for companies linked to a person via public mandates. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like build_company_mandate_graph, but the search scope is clear.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions providing birth month increases reliability, but does not state when this tool is preferred over other mandate-related tools such as build_company_mandate_graph or get_inpi_rne_record. No exclusions or use-case context are given.

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