source

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Return' implies a read-only lookup, but the description says nothing about permissions, what happens when the id does not exist, or whether the fiche is scoped to a user or tenant.

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 short sentence with the action front-loaded and no filler. It is appropriately sized for a one-parameter lookup, though it is terse to the point of underspecification.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the tool is a simple single-item fetch. Still, for a tool with no annotations the description should at minimum clarify what a 'source fiche' is and how the id is obtained.

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?

With one parameter and 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It only says 'by id', which merely restates the parameter name without adding format, provenance, or expected source of the id value.

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 gives a clear verb ('Return') and a scope ('one source fiche by id'), which implicitly contrasts with the sibling search tools that return sets. However, 'source fiche' is unexplained domain jargon, so an agent cannot be fully certain what resource is being fetched or how it differs from bopa_document or tramit.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus the many search siblings (search_catalog, bopa_search, govern_search, etc.). The only implied guidance is 'by id', which suggests use after a search has produced an id, but that inference is left entirely to the agent.

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