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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context — that the response includes the line items and the underlying REST path — but says nothing about not-found behavior or required auth, so it is useful but not thorough.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the core payload description (id plus lines) front-loaded before the endpoint detail. Every clause carries information an agent can act on.

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 one-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description covers what is returned (header plus lines) and how to address the record, which is sufficient to invoke correctly. Missing only an explicit pointer to the list sibling for id discovery.

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?

There is a single required parameter with 100% schema description coverage ("KiotViet goods receipt id."), so the schema already does the work. The description's "by id" adds no syntax, format, or provenance detail beyond that, which is the baseline-3 case for a fully documented one-param 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 (retrieve one), a specific entity (goods order / goods receipt, with the Vietnamese term nhap hang for disambiguation), and scope (by id, with its lines). The singular "one ... by id" implicitly separates it from kiotviet_list_purchase_orders, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer it should call this when it already has a numeric receipt id and should call kiotviet_list_purchase_orders when it does not. The description never states that precondition or names the alternative, so the routing decision is left to inference.

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