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

Discloses irreversibility ('point of no return'), what gets frozen, the precondition failures, and the post-call hand-off. Annotations already cover non-readonly, non-idempotent behavior, so the description adds real value; it could state more about what a failed/partial issue leaves behind.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and effects, and the ordering guidance is useful. Mild redundancy: 'the preview link becomes the document' appears twice and the freeze/due-date behavior is restated.

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 a one-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers preconditions, confirmation protocol, effects, failure behavior, and the required follow-up call — everything an agent needs to invoke it responsibly.

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?

Only one parameter (invoice_id) with 100% schema coverage, so the schema already documents it. The description adds the context that it must be a draft, but no format/source details 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?

States a specific verb+resource (issue the draft invoice) and describes the concrete effects: seller and bill-to blocks frozen, due date computed, preview link becomes the document. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like solo_draft_invoice and solo_update_draft.

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?

Explicitly says to show the preview (doc_path) and numbers and get confirmation BEFORE calling, and to call solo_get_document afterward and hand over pdf_url. It also names preconditions (company profile, customer billing address) and says the refusal message tells you what to gather.

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