Détails d'un positionnement

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds 'détaillées' (detailed) but does not elaborate on what 'detailed' entails (e.g., fields returned). No behavioral traits like rate limits or auth needs are mentioned, but annotations cover the core safety aspects.

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?

Single sentence of 10 words, direct and to the point. No extraneous information. Perfectly concise for a simple retrieval tool.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate. It tells the agent what the tool does and how to call it. However, it lacks a brief explanation of what a 'positionnement' is, which could help context, but the sibling list provides domain context. Overall, sufficiently complete for this complexity level.

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 a full description for the single parameter 'id'. The description merely restates 'par son ID', adding no semantic value beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does the heavy lifting.

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' (retrieves) and clearly identifies the resource 'positionnement' (positioning) with the method 'par son ID' (by its ID). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create, delete, search, and update.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like boond_positionings_search. The description only mentions retrieval by ID, but does not state that for listing or filtering, the search variant should be used. No prerequisites or context are provided.

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