Rechercher des business units

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, so the description adds value by describing the return format (list with ID, name, details) and pagination defaults. No contradictions.

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 a single paragraph plus parameter list, front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence is useful, no redundancy.

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 an output schema present, the description's summary of return fields (ID, name, details) is sufficient. Pagination and keyword search are fully explained.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description repeats schema info and adds default values for page and max for pageSize, but does not provide substantial additional meaning beyond what the schema already offers. Baseline 3.

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 tool searches for business units in BoondManager using keywords with pagination. It includes a specific verb (rechercher), resource (business units), and method (mots-clés, pagination), distinguishing it from the get tool for a single unit.

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 indicates usage for searching by keywords and pagination, with parameter defaults and constraints. It does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with siblings, but the context of sibling tools (e.g., get vs search) provides implicit guidance.

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