Créer un(e) projet

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

Annotations are present (readOnlyHint false indicates write operation) and consistent. The description adds that the tool returns the created project data with its ID, which is useful. However, it doesn't disclose any side effects, authorization requirements, or default behaviors beyond what annotations imply. The description adds some value but is 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 extremely concise: two sentences. The first sentence clearly states the action, and the second summarizes the return value. No extraneous information.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return fields. It mentions the key fact of returning data with ID. The tool has 9 parameters, all described in schema, so completeness is adequate. Minor improvement would be noting default states or required relationships.

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%, so the input schema already documents all 9 parameters. The description does not provide additional meaning or context beyond the schema. A baseline score 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 clearly states it creates a new project in BoondManager. The verb 'Crée' and resource 'projet' are specific. Among sibling tools, it is uniquely for projects, distinguishing it from other create tools like boond_absences_create or boond_companies_create.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, such as needing a companyId or contactId, or how state values map. The lack of context for when to create a project vs. using other project-related tools (e.g., boond_projects_update) leaves the agent uninformed.

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