Achats d'une société

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds that the operation returns a list, but doesn't disclose additional behavioral nuances (e.g., whether it includes both purchases and subcontracting, pagination, or filtering). No contradiction found.

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 brief, front-loaded with the main action, and has a clear structure separating arguments and return value. It could omit the Args block since the schema already documents the parameter, but it's not redundant enough to be a problem.

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 no output schema, the description provides a minimal return type ('Liste des achats'), but doesn't specify what elements the list contains, whether it includes subcontracting as mentioned in the title, or any limitations. Given the low complexity, this is adequate but leaves some ambiguity.

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 description adds the meaning that the id refers to a company ('ID de la société'), which is more specific than the schema's generic 'Identifiant unique de l'entité BoondManager'. This clarifies the parameter's role beyond the schema description.

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 retrieves purchases/subcontracting for a company ('Récupère les achats/sous-traitance d'une société'). It uses a specific verb and resource, but doesn't explicitly distinguish it from sibling tools like boond_companies_provider_invoices or boond_companies_orders.

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. The description only states the function and parameter, without any contextual hints about use cases, exclusions, or distinguishing features relative to other company-related retrieval tools.

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