Bons de commande d'une société

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., behavior on missing ID, pagination). It is consistent but minimal beyond 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 extremely concise: one sentence plus a clear Args/Returns block. No redundant information, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 no output schema, the description only says 'Liste des bons de commande' without detailing the structure of each order. For a retrieval tool, this is adequate but not rich. The agent lacks return field details, which may require inference. Completeness is acceptable but could be improved.

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 tool description specifies that parameter 'id' is the company ID ('ID de la société'), while the schema description says 'Identifiant unique de l'entité BoondManager'—generic. The description adds specific meaning, compensating for schema generality. Schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3, but the added clarity warrants a 4.

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 'Récupère les bons de commande d'une société' uses a specific verb ('Récupère') and resource ('bons de commande d'une société'), clearly indicating retrieval of purchase orders for a company. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like boond_companies_invoices or boond_orders_search.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as boond_orders_search or boond_contacts_orders. The description only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer usage context without help.

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