Productivité d'un projet

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds minor context about the type of data returned (time spent, days consumed) but does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond what annotations offer. No contradiction.

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 concise, with a clear structure: purpose sentence followed by Args and Returns sections. It is front-loaded and uses no extraneous words, though it could be slightly more structured.

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 simple one-parameter tool with rich annotations, the description is adequate. It provides examples of returned data ('temps passé, jours consommés...') which partially compensates for the missing output schema. However, it is vague on the exact return structure.

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 clear description for 'id'. The description repeats the parameter slightly differently ('ID du projet') but adds no meaningful semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 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 'Récupère les données de productivité d'un projet' (Retrieves productivity data of a project), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like boond_projects_get by focusing on productivity metrics.

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 for productivity data but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., boond_projects_get for general project info). There are no exclusions or context on prerequisites.

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