Rechercher des calendriers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, which cover safety and side effects. The description adds that the tool returns a list, but does not disclose pagination behavior, rate limits, or result ordering beyond what is implicit in the schema parameters. This is adequate but not enriched.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence. Every word serves a purpose, and no redundancy exists.

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 the tool is a search with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain the return structure (e.g., fields, count), how keywords apply, or how pagination works beyond schema defaults. Annotations provide safety context, but behavioral details are missing.

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 coverage is 100% (all parameters have descriptions), so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters—it merely states the return type. No parameter-specific details are provided 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 explicitly states 'Recherche des calendriers dans BoondManager' (Search calendars in BoondManager), providing a clear verb-resource pairing. It distinguishes from the sibling tool boond_calendars_get (which likely retrieves a single calendar) by indicating a search operation returning multiple results.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like boond_calendars_get or other search tools. The description does not specify scenarios, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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