Reporting ressources

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

Annotations already provide safety profile (readOnly, idempotent). Description adds minimal behavioral context beyond repeating schema details (required dates, pagination). No disclosure of authorization needs or rate limits.

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?

Description is relatively concise (two sentences plus bullet list) and front-loaded with purpose. However, it includes an emoji and some redundancy with schema. Not overly verbose, but could be more streamlined.

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 no output schema, description partially compensates by listing example metrics and stating return is 'Données de reporting'. However, lacks details on data structure, pagination continuation, or total results. Adequate but not thorough.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description lists parameters but adds little meaning beyond schema descriptions (e.g., date format is in pattern, keywords wording is similar). No new semantic context.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Recherche' and resource 'reporting des ressources' with examples of metrics (taux d'occupation, CA, productivité). This distinguishes it from sibling reporting tools like boond_reporting_companies and boond_reporting_synthesis.

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. It mentions required parameters but lacks when-not-to-use or alternative tool references, leaving the agent to infer context.

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