Drapeaux posés sur un enregistrement

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description reinforces this with 'Lecture seule'. It adds value by specifying the return shape ('une ligne par drapeau posé') and the underlying endpoint, providing useful behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage guidance and return information. Every section earns its place, and the entity list, while long, is necessary to identify supported record types.

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 read-only list tool with two fully documented parameters, the description is complete: it specifies when to use it, what it returns, and that it is read-only. It lacks details about the exact fields in each returned flag, but that is not essential for correct tool selection and invocation.

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 the baseline is 3. The description enumerates the same entity types found in the schema enum and confirms the id is numeric, but it does not add significant new meaning beyond what the structured schema already provides.

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 states a specific action ('Liste les drapeaux posés sur...') and enumerates the supported record types, giving an agent a precise picture of scope. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from `boond_flags_search`, which helps differentiate siblings.

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 includes a clear 'Quand' section stating when to use the tool (before adding or removing a flag) and a 'Plutôt que' section naming the alternative `boond_flags_search` with the reason it is not the right choice. This is explicit, actionable guidance.

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