acedatacloud_get_order_invoice

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden. It does disclose a meaningful behavioral trait ('current active' selection) and the order linkage, but it doesn't explain what happens when no active invoice exists, how 'active' is defined, or whether any special permissions are needed.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler, repetition, or redundant information. It is appropriately concise for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The tool has only one well-documented parameter and an output schema, so the description doesn't need to cover return structure. However, it lacks guidance on distinguishing this from get_invoice/list_invoices and doesn't clarify the semantics of 'current active' or edge cases, leaving some context incomplete.

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 100%: the only parameter, order_id, is documented as 'Order UUID.' The tool description adds the relationship context ('linked to an order') but doesn't add new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and a specific resource ('current active invoice linked to an order'). It clearly differentiates this from generic invoice tools like acedatacloud_get_invoice by scoping to an order and specifying 'active'.

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 it—when you need the active invoice for a given order—but it does not explicitly mention alternatives such as acedatacloud_get_invoice or acedatacloud_list_invoices, nor does it state when not to use it.

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