Télécharger un document

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

Annotations already convey readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds: content returned as MCP embedded resource (base64 for binaries, plain text), max 5 MB limit, and that it should be used sparingly due to context cost. No contradiction with 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?

Concise with clear sections. The description is front-loaded with the action and examples, then limitations. Could be slightly more compact but overall well-structured.

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 simple input (1 param), good annotations, and no output schema, the description effectively covers purpose, limitations, and ID sourcing. Complete enough for an agent to use 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 has 100% coverage for the single 'id' parameter. Description adds value by explaining how to find IDs (from entity tabs like boond_candidates_information), which is beyond schema definition.

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 verb 'Télécharge' and the resource 'contenu d'un document BoondManager', with examples of document types (CV, justificatif, contrat, facture). It distinguishes itself by referencing sibling tools like boond_candidates_information that expose document IDs.

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 context on when to use: only when file content is needed (base64 uses context). Also explains where to find IDs. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use, the guidance is clear enough for an agent.

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