Bons de commande d'un projet

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it 'retrieves' data, which aligns with annotations. It does not disclose further behavioral traits like authorization needs or pagination, but annotations cover the critical safety profile.

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, with a single sentence explaining the purpose, followed by a clear argument list and return type. No redundant information; every element serves a purpose.

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 tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description fully explains the operation, input, and output. Combined with annotations, no additional context is needed.

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 description for 'id' is generic ('Identifiant unique de l'entité BoondManager'), while the tool description specifies 'ID du projet' (project ID). This adds meaningful context beyond the schema, improving parameter understanding.

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 retrieves purchase orders (bons de commande) for a project, using a specific verb and resource. The title and name further reinforce this, distinguishing it from siblings like boond_projects_get or boond_projects_search.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool (to get purchase orders for a project), but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare it to alternatives. However, the specificity makes misuse unlikely.

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