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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes safety, and the description reinforces this with 'No documents are changed or finalized.' However, it does not disclose pagination behavior, ordering, or what a line item contains beyond the bare endpoint.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. The endpoint is placed after the purpose statement, and the safety clarification follows logically.

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 read-only list tool with annotations covering safety, the description is mostly adequate. But with no output schema and no explanation of return values, the agent is left guessing what fields a line item includes and whether pagination metadata is returned.

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 67%: page and page_size are documented in the schema, but document_id has no description. The phrase 'of a sales document' implies document_id is a sales document identifier, which adds marginal meaning 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 and resource: 'Read all line items of a sales document.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_sales_document (document header) and list_sales_documents (document list).

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 name and description imply when to use it, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool versus get_sales_document or how to obtain the required document_id. Usage is inferable but not spelled out.

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