list_recent_invoicesList the most recent invoices, newest first, optionally filtered by status. Answers "show me my latest invoices" or "which invoices are overdue?"
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | How many to return (default 10, max 50). | |
| status | No | Optional status filter: draft, sent, viewed, overdue, paid, or void. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| items | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description carries less burden. The description adds that results are 'newest first' and that filtering is optional, which are useful behavioral traits beyond the annotations. No contradictions.
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?
Two concise sentences with no wasted words. The action is front-loaded: 'List the most recent invoices...' followed by constraints and examples. Every sentence adds value.
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 the output schema exists (not shown but indicated), the description need not explain return values. It covers the tool's purpose, ordering, and filter options. Could mention pagination but not necessary for a list with a limit parameter. Adequate for the complexity.
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%, so the schema already documents both parameters fully. The description adds meaningful context: 'newest first' for ordering and 'optionally filtered by status' with example statuses, enhancing the agent's understanding beyond the schema.
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?
Clearly states 'list the most recent invoices, newest first, optionally filtered by status.' The verb 'list' and resource 'invoices' are explicit, and the ordering and filtering distinction is made. Differentiates from sibling tools like 'list_outstanding_invoices' and 'get_invoice_details' by specifying 'recent' and 'newest first'.
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?
Provides example use cases: 'answers "show me my latest invoices" or "which invoices are overdue?"' This gives clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, though siblings like 'list_outstanding_invoices' exist.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a specific financial, client, project, or tax aspect with clear, distinct descriptions. Overlaps like get_cost_summary vs get_expense_summary are resolved by explicit scope differences (costs include mileage and bills; expenses are line-item). No two tools serve the same purpose.
All 25 tools follow a strict `verb_noun` pattern: `get_` for detailed summaries and `list_` for enumerations. No mixed conventions (camelCase, abbreviations) are present, making the pattern predictable for an agent.
At 25 tools, the set is on the larger side but fully justified by the breadth of the domain (financial summaries, clients, projects, taxes, contacts, time, mileage). Each tool covers a distinct slice; minor redundancies (e.g., cost vs expense summary) are acceptable due to nuanced differences.
The surface covers essential business operations: revenue, costs, expenses, cash, invoices, bills, projects, clients, contacts, taxes, time, mileage, and goals. Notably missing are any mutation tools (create/update), but the server appears intentionally read-only (analytics/reporting). For that purpose, the coverage is strong.