Détails d'un(e) agence

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds the behavior that an unknown ID will surface the BoondManager error as-is, and that the ID must come from `boond_agencies_search`, never from a guess. This is useful context beyond the annotations.

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 concise and well-structured: it opens with the core purpose, then provides usage context, a clear contrast with the sibling, a behavior note, and a returns description. Each sentence earns its place, and key information is front-loaded.

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?

The description is complete for this simple one-parameter read tool. It covers what it returns (JSON of the entity with attributes and relations), the read-only nature, error behavior for unknown IDs, and its role in the workflow. The only minor gap is not detailing exact response fields, but that's not critical given the output is JSON from the API.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the parameter `id` is adequately described as the unique BoondManager entity identifier (numeric). The description reinforces that the ID must be obtained from the search tool)Skip, which adds context beyond the schema. No additional parameter details are needed.

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 the purpose: retrieving the full record of an agency by its numeric ID. It specifies the resource ('fiche complète d'un(e) agence') and the action ('Récupère'), and it distinguishes this tool from the search tool by noting it does not accept names, only IDs.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool: after a `boond_agencies_search` to get full attributes not in the list summary. It also states when NOT to use it: if the ID is not known, use `boond_agencies_search` instead. This clear routing is very helpful.

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