Rechercher des logs

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

Annotations cover readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the read-only nature is already declared. The description adds that it returns a list of matching logs ('Returns: Liste des logs correspondants'), which is minor value but doesn't fill gaps like pagination limits or result limit behavior beyond what schema provides.

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?

Description is compact (2 short sentences) and front-loaded with the primary purpose first. No wasted words, though the 'Returns' line is somewhat redundant given the output schema exists.

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 simple search tool with full schema documentation (100% coverage) and an output schema present, the description covers the essential purpose. However, it doesn't clarify that multiple search tools exist (boond_logs_search vs boond_logs_get) and doesn't explain result filtering nuances or whether keyword search applies across specific fields, leaving 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for all 4 parameters (page, pageSize, keywords, fields) including defaults, ranges, and projection semantics. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already documents, so 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?

Description states 'Recherche des logs d'audit dans BoondManager (historique des actions utilisateurs)' which uses a specific verb+resource and clarifies it's about audit logs/user action history. It's distinguishable from boond_logs_get (single log retrieval) though it doesn't explicitly name that sibling.

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 when-to-use guidance, no filter specification guidance beyond the parameter definitions. With sibling boond_logs_get existing, there's no distinction between when to use search vs get. The description merely says it searches logs without any usage context or exclusions.

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