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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the source context ('QuickBooks Online') and reinforces the direct-lookup nature; it says nothing about not-found behavior, error modes, or the optional multi-company resolution, so it adds modest value beyond structured data.

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 tight sentence with the verb, resource, lookup key and usage condition front-loaded. There is no filler or restated title, and every clause carries information.

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 read-only get-by-id tool whose annotations cover safety and whose schema fully documents both parameters, the description is essentially complete. The only minor gap is that no output schema exists and the description doesn't hint at the returned receipt shape or failure behavior.

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%, with both 'id' and 'company' documented in the schema itself, so the baseline is 3. The description echoes the Id lookup but says nothing about the optional 'company' parameter, adding no meaning the schema lacks.

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 and resource ('Get a single sales receipt'), the source system ('QuickBooks Online'), and the lookup key ('by Id'). The word 'single' plus the Id lookup cleanly separates it from the search_sales_receipts sibling without opening either schema.

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 clause 'when no search or write answer already holds it' gives a real usage condition, steering the agent away from this tool if a search/list result or a write response already contains the receipt. However, it gestures at 'search' generically rather than naming search_sales_receipts, and offers no explicit when-not or prerequisite guidance.

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