Factures impayées à relancer

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds crucial context: returns a runbook text that the model must execute by calling referenced Boond tools. This goes beyond annotations to inform agent behavior.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with core purpose, then optional filtering, then equivalence to MCP prompt. Efficient and clear with no wasted words.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool does, its input, and what it returns (a runbook). For a read-only, single-parameter tool with good annotations, this is 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?

The sole parameter 'society_id' has a rich description explaining it accepts numeric ID or company name, with auto-resolution via `boond_companies_search`. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type definition.

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 the tool lists unpaid invoices with past due dates, grouped by company. The verb 'Liste' and resource 'factures impayées' are specific. It distinguishes itself from sibling workflow tools by its focused purpose.

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?

Provides guidance on optional filtering by a specific company and explains when to use this tool over the equivalent MCP prompt (for clients that don't handle prompts well). No exclusions or alternatives are given, but context is clear.

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