Téléverser un document

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, but description adds meaningful behavioral details: the API downloads the file itself, no local file is read, and parsing=true triggers Boond AI analysis. It also discloses the return value (metadata with ID). This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent understand side effects.

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, with the main action front-loaded. It uses three short paragraphs: action/behavior, typical use cases, and return value. Every sentence adds relevant information without 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?

For a create tool with a rich input schema and an output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, typical scenarios, and return metadata. It does not mention error cases or permissions, but given the annotations and schema, it is sufficiently complete for an AI agent to invoke correctly.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by linking parameters together: parentType=candidateResume with parsing=true for CV analysis, and examples like expensesReport. This clarifies the intended use of parameters beyond their individual schema descriptions.

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's function: 'Attache un document à une entité BoondManager à partir d'une URL' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like boond_documents_get/delete by being the create operation. Typical use cases further clarify the scope.

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?

Provides explicit typical use cases: attaching a CV to a candidate with parsing=true, a receipt to an expensesReport, and documents to projects/companies. It also clarifies the URL-based behavior and the parsing option, giving clear context for when to use it. Does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the examples serve as strong guidance.

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