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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, closed-world and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the sort order ('newest first'), which is genuine value beyond annotations, but says nothing about pagination behavior or scope of rows returned.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a trivial list tool, though the terse phrasing leaves little room for the routing hint that would help.

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?

Given rich annotations and a fully documented schema, the description is minimally sufficient to call the tool correctly. It omits whether rows are tenant-scoped or filtered in any way, which an agent would want to know before listing.

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 description coverage is 100% and both parameters (limit, cursor) are documented in the schema, including the legacy bare-array caveat. The description adds nothing about them, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (myinvois_invoice rows), plus an ordering guarantee ('newest first'). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from myinvois_invoice_search or myinvois_invoice_read, though 'list rows' vs 'search'/'read' is reasonably inferable.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus myinvois_invoice_search or myinvois_invoice_read, and no mention of prerequisites or exclusions. The only implicit cue is that this enumerates rather than searches.

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