brc_get_sales_credit_note

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states it 'gets' a credit note, omitting any mention of read-only nature, possible errors (e.g., ID not found), authentication requirements, or rate limits. The agent cannot infer safety or side-effects.

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, focused sentence that efficiently conveys the core action. It is not unnecessarily long, though it could benefit from a bit more detail without becoming verbose.

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 the lack of output schema and annotations, the description does not provide enough context. It does not describe the structure of the returned credit note, error handling, or prerequisites (e.g., needing the company name and a valid ID). The tool is simple but still leaves gaps.

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% with both parameters described ('Sales credit note id.', 'Company context name, for example YOUR-COMPANY-NAME.'). The description adds no additional semantic value beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the action ('Gets') and the resource ('one BRC sales credit note by id'), distinguishing it from list operations like brc_list_sales_credit_notes. The purpose is specific and unambiguous, though it could more explicitly differentiate from other single-get tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not mention that brc_list_sales_credit_notes should be used to retrieve multiple notes, or that this tool requires a known ID. The agent receives no contextual usage advice.

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