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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/non-destructive, and the description adds the default window, the 31-day maximum span, and the fields returned — useful operational context. It doesn't cover pagination or what happens if only one date is supplied, keeping it at 4.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the resource and default scope, with the date-range constraint immediately after. No filler.

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?

With no output schema, listing the returned fields is valuable and the default/limit behavior is stated. Endpoint path adds little but isn't harmful; pagination behavior remains unaddressed, so not a full 5.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already states yyyy-mm-dd format and 'give both dates, max 31 days apart', so the description's date guidance largely repeats structured data. Baseline 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 plus a clarifying gloss ('the seller's statements from bol') and enumerates the fields returned (invoice id, issue date, type, period, media types). It does not differentiate against the nearby bol_get_invoice_specification sibling, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Gives clear default behavior ('by default the past 4 weeks') and the condition for changing it ('Pass both dates to look further back (max 31 days)'). No explicit when-not-to-use or named alternative is given, so it stops short of 5.

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