Téléverser un document

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

The description explains that the API downloads the file from a URL and does not read a local file, which is useful behavioral clarification. Since annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, the description adds value by detailing the download mechanism and the parsing option.

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: a main sentence stating the purpose, followed by typical use cases in a list, and a return note. Every sentence adds value 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?

The description covers the main aspects: action, input (URL), typical parent types, parsing option, and return value (metadata with ID). It does not mention error handling or prerequisites, but given the tool's complexity and the presence of schema/annotations, it is reasonably complete.

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% with good parameter descriptions. The description adds extra context, such as the typical use of 'parsing' for candidate resumes and the meaning of 'fileUrl'. This enriches understanding beyond the schema alone.

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 action ('Attache un document') and the specific resource ('entité BoondManager') from a URL. It differentiates from sibling tools like boond_documents_get and boond_documents_delete by focusing on creation, and provides concrete examples (CV, expense report).

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 gives typical use cases (attaching CV, expense report, etc.) and notes the parsing parameter for candidate resumes. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context is clear enough given the sibling tools include only get/delete for documents.

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