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

Discloses key behavioral traits: permanent deletion, precondition (must be draft), and the preview vs. execution mode controlled by 'confirm' parameter. Transparent about the destructive nature, which is critical for a deletion tool.

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, each essential. The first sentence states purpose, the second states important constraint, the third explains the key parameter behavior. No redundancy, well front-loaded.

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?

Covers the essential aspects: what it does, constraints, and behavior of the key parameter. Missing details like error conditions (e.g., what if invoice is not draft or already deleted) and the structure of the preview response. However, for a deletion tool, this is fairly complete. Could benefit from mentioning error handling.

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 already covers all parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by explaining the preview/confirm behavior tied to the 'confirm' parameter, which is not fully captured in the schema description alone. Improves the agent's understanding of how to use the parameter.

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?

Description explicitly states the action (delete) and resource (draft invoice), and distinguishes from issued invoices. The verb 'delete' and qualifier 'draft' are specific and differentiate from related sibling tools like 'void_invoice' or 'issue_invoice'.

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?

Clearly states that only draft invoices can be deleted and that issued invoices are permanent, guiding the agent when to use this tool. Does not explicitly name alternatives for issued invoices (e.g., 'void_invoice'), but the context of sibling tools provides that hint.

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