Achats/sous-traitance d'un projet

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it returns a list of purchases, which is consistent but does not reveal additional behavioral traits such as pagination or data format. It neither contradicts nor enriches the annotations significantly.

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 two sentences front-loading the purpose. Every word is necessary and there is no redundancy. Ideal for quick understanding.

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 one-parameter retrieval tool with no output schema, the description adequately states what it returns (list of purchases). However, it could mention if there are limits or default sorting, but given the simplicity, it is nearly complete.

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% for the single parameter 'id'. The tool description repeats 'ID du projet' similarly to the schema's 'Identifiant unique de l'entité BoondManager', adding no new semantic value beyond the schema.

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 the verb 'Récupère' (retrieves) and specifies the resource 'achats et sous-traitance associés à un projet' (purchases and subcontracting of a project). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like boond_purchases_search (generic search) and boond_companies_purchases (by company).

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 project-related purchases but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like boond_purchases_search. No exclusions or context for selection are given.

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