Détails d'une notification

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds only that the operation retrieves 'informations détaillées', which is minor and does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as return format, pagination, or rate limits. This is consistent with annotations, so no contradiction.

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 a single, succinct sentence that immediately states the action and the parameter requirement. It is front-loaded with the main verb and resource, contains no filler, and is appropriately sized for a simple get-by-id operation.

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 tool is low in complexity (one required parameter, no output schema, no nested objects) and the annotations provide safety context. The description sufficiently covers what the tool does and hints at the return being 'detailed information'. While no output schema exists, the simplicity of a get-by-id typically makes the response shape predictable enough for the AI agent to proceed.

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?

The schema provides 100% coverage for the 'id' parameter, including its type and a description ('Identifiant unique de l'entité BoondManager (numérique)'). The description only reiterates that the lookup is 'par son ID', adding no new meaning beyond what the schema already documents. Thus the baseline of 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 uses a specific verb ('Récupère') and resource ('notification'), and specifies the retrieval method ('par son ID'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like boond_notifications_search, which lists notifications rather than fetching a single one by ID.

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 clearly indicates the context: use this when you have a notification ID and need its details. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the 'by its ID' phrasing implies that a prior search or listing is needed to obtain the ID, giving clear usage context without exclusions.

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