Détails d'un(e) todolist

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no new behavioral context beyond what annotations and the schema provide, which is acceptable for a simple read operation.

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?

A single, front-loaded French sentence that precisely states the action, resource, and lookup method. Every word is functional, with no redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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, read-only, idempotent getter with strong annotations, the description is sufficient. The word 'détaillées' reasonably implies a full entity object response, and the lack of output schema does not create ambiguity for this low-complexity tool.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a clear description for the 'id' parameter, so the schema carries the semantic weight. The description's 'par son ID' merely restates the schema without adding extra meaning or constraining behavior further.

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 a specific verb 'Récupère' and resource 'todolist', and explicitly states the retrieval method 'par son ID', clearly distinguishing this get-by-ID tool from the sibling search tool. The scope is unambiguous and actionable.

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 when a specific todolist ID is known, but does not explicitly mention alternatives like boond_todolists_search or provide when-not-to-use guidance. The ID parameter and 'par son ID' hint at the use case, but no exclusions are stated.

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