Détail entreprise

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the important behavioral constraint that the entrepriseId must correspond to the enterprise linked to the token, which is beyond what the annotations state. The GET method also reinforces the read-only nature.

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 very short, front-loaded with the purpose, and followed by the ID constraint and endpoint. The only minor redundancy is that 'Détail entreprise' repeats the tool title, but overall it is compact and clear.

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 detail endpoint with a fully documented schema and safety annotations, the description provides the essential constraint and endpoint. It could be richer by naming the expected return fields or differentiating from getCompanyInfo, but nothing critical is missing for invoking the tool correctly.

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 already documents entrepriseId as 'ID entreprise encodé (hashid)' with 100% coverage. The description adds extra parameter-level meaning by requiring the ID to match the token's enterprise, which is not present in the schema. This is modest but useful additional 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?

The description clearly identifies the resource (entreprise) and the operation (GET /entreprises/{entrepriseId}), and the title 'Détail entreprise' makes the intent obvious. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like getCompanyInfo, so it loses the point for sibling differentiation.

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 gives a useful precondition: 'L'ID doit correspondre à l'entreprise du token' (the ID must match the token's company), implying this tool should only be used for the authenticated company's enterprise. However, it does not state when to choose this over alternatives such as getCompanyInfo, or when not to use it.

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