brc_generate_sales_invoice_from_quote

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully carries the burden. It accurately discloses the two-phase behavior (preview then write) and the requirement for explicit user confirmation. This is transparent and prevents misuse.

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 three sentences, each earning its place: first states purpose, second explains the two-step process, third reinforces the confirmation requirement. No fluff.

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 no output schema, the description mentions return of confirmation_required and preview, which is sufficient. The tool's complexity is moderate and the description covers all necessary context for correct invocation.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning for the confirmWrite parameter by explaining its role in the workflow (preview vs. actual creation), which goes beyond the schema's 'Must be true only after...' explanation.

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 clearly states 'Generates a sales invoice from a BRC quote' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from many sibling tools focused on other operations (create/update/list) by being the only one that generates an invoice from a quote with a two-phase workflow.

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 provides explicit step-by-step usage: first call without confirmWrite for preview, then retry with confirmWrite: true only after user confirmation. It also warns that 'passing preflight is not confirmation,' leaving no ambiguity about when and how to use.

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