Details d'un paiement

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 a little context by stating it gets 'detailed information' but does not disclose any unexpected behavior, auth requirements, or return format. This is adequate but not rich.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or repetition.

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 simple with one fully documented parameter and clear annotations. The absence of an output schema is partially mitigated by the explicit 'detailed information' phrase, though the agent might not know the exact structure of the returned payment. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for a straightforward get-by-ID operation.

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 description coverage is 100% since the 'id' parameter is fully described as 'Identifiant unique de l'entité BoondManager (numérique)'. The tool description merely repeats that the lookup is by ID, adding no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 tool retrieves detailed payment information by ID, using a specific verb ('Recupere') and resource ('paiement / reglement'). It is distinct from the sibling boond_payments_search, as it is a by-ID lookup rather than a search, and the title 'Details d'un paiement' reinforces this.

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 the tool should be used when you have a specific payment ID and need its details, which is clear context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, such as when to use boond_payments_search instead, so it falls short of a 5.

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