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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond annotations: results are newest first and paginated at 50 per page. It does not cover rate limits or authentication, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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 very compact and front-loaded: the core action, ordering, pagination, and filtering are all covered in two short sentences with no waste.

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 annotations covering safety and no output schema to explain, the description gives enough context to invoke it correctly: ordering, page size, and both filter concepts. Pagination details and enum semantics are the main remaining gaps.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It clarifies that 'q' searches by customer or number and that 'type' filters by document type, but it does not explain page numbering/defaults, and it does not map enum values such as quote, invoice, credit_note, and cancellation to their meanings.

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 verb and resource: 'Belege auflisten' (list documents). It adds useful scope details such as newest-first ordering, page size, and filtering, making it clearly a list operation rather than a get/create/update operation. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling tool to contrast with.

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 implies when to use the tool by explaining filtering by type and search term, but it does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like get_document or list_customers. Usage guidance is present but mostly inferred.

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