Rechercher des drapeaux/étiquettes

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds that it returns a list, but does not elaborate on pagination, ordering, or error behavior. With annotations covering core behavioral traits, the description adds limited but acceptable context.

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 two sentences long and to the point. It uses clear language and front-loads the purpose. It loses one point for not being slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points for parameters), but it is highly concise.

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?

There is no output schema, yet the description only states 'Liste des drapeaux correspondants' without describing the structure or fields of a flag. Given the lack of output schema and the complexity of search results, this is incomplete. The agent cannot know what data it will receive.

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% (all three parameters have descriptions with defaults and constraints). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, merely restating the tool's purpose. Per rules, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool searches for 'drapeaux' (flags/étiquettes) in BoondManager and returns a list of matching flags. The verb 'Recherche' and resource 'drapeaux' are specific. Among siblings, 'boond_flags_get' retrieves a single flag, so this search tool is distinct.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'boond_flags_get' or other search tools. No context is given about when not to use it or prerequisites. An agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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