Détails d'une action

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

Annotations already provide readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive hints. The description adds useful behavioral context: unknown IDs cause the raw BoondManager error to be returned, and the response includes attributes plus relations as returned by the API. It also confirms the operation is read-only.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core action, and uses short labeled sections for when to use, what not to use, error behavior, and return value. Every sentence contributes useful information without repetition.

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 single-parameter read-only getter, this description is complete. It explains the purpose, when to use it, what the response contains, and the error behavior for invalid IDs. The annotation set covers safety, and no output schema is needed since the return format is described.

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 schema already fully documents the single 'id' parameter with type, pattern, and description. The description adds meaningful usage semantics by specifying that the ID is numeric and must originate from boond_actions_search, never from assumption. This extra provenance guidance goes beyond the schema.

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 and resource: 'Récupère la fiche complète d'un(e) action par son ID numérique.' It clearly distinguishes itself from boond_actions_search by noting it retrieves full attributes not present in the list summary, and it is also distinct from create/update/delete siblings.

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?

Explicit guidance is given: use after boond_actions_search to obtain full attributes, and avoid it in favor of boond_actions_search when the ID is not known because this tool does not accept a name. The warning that IDs must come from boond_actions_search, never from guesswork, is especially strong.

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