Resume Recurring Invoice

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: 'The next invoice will be generated on the next scheduled cycle date after resumption.' Annotations provide idempotentHint=true, and description confirms non-destructive, non-readOnly behavior.

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?

Extremely concise: two short sentences (English and Spanish) that front-load the key action and effect. No wasted words.

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 tool's simplicity (1 required param, high schema coverage, annotations present), the description adequately explains the effect. It could mention prerequisites (e.g., template must be paused) but is still sufficient.

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 covers the single parameter 'id' 100% (with bilingual explanation). The description does not add new meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Resume a paused recurring invoice template') and the resource ('recurring invoice template'), with a specific verb. It distinguishes from siblings like 'pause_recurring_invoice' and 'create_recurring_invoice'.

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 implicitly tells when to use (when a template is paused), but does not explicitly mention when not to use or provide alternative tools. However, the context from the name and sibling tools makes it clear.

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