Détails d'un(e) bon de commande

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the adjective 'détaillées' (detailed) but provides no additional behavioral context such as error handling or response format. This is minimal but not contradictory.

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?

One short sentence in French that front-loads the action and resource. No filler or 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?

For a simple get-by-ID tool with a single parameter and rich safety annotations, the description is adequate. It doesn't specify the exact return fields, but 'detailed information' implies a full order object, and no output schema exists to explain further.

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 fully documents the single 'id' parameter with pattern and description, achieving 100% coverage. The description merely reiterates the ID-based lookup without adding format or semantics beyond the schema.

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 the specific verb 'récupère' (retrieves) and identifies the resource as 'bon de commande' (purchase order), with 'par son ID' clearly distinguishing this from search or listing tools. It directly reflects the title but adds the ID-based retrieval scope.

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 implies usage when you have a specific order ID and need its details, but it does not explicitly contrast with boond_orders_search or mention when not to use it. The context is clear but no exclusions or alternatives are stated.

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