stripe_send_invoice

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden. It discloses the dry-run default, the wrapping of send_invoice.py, and the condition for actual sending (confirm:true). This provides clear behavioral expectations beyond what schema alone offers.

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 extremely concise with two sentences: the first defines the primary action, the second details the critical dry-run behavior. Every word is purposeful, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 7 optional parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description adequately explains the tool's core functionality and unique behavior (dry-run vs send). It mentions printing totals, which gives insight into the return format. However, it does not cover error handling or prerequisites, but for this tool it is 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add significant extra meaning beyond what the parameter descriptions already specify (e.g., default values, mutual exclusivity of lines_csv_path and hours). It confirms the dry-run vs send mechanism tied to confirm, but this is already clear from the schema description.

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 tool drafts and optionally sends a Stripe invoice, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like stripe_list_recent_invoices by focusing on invoice creation/sending rather than listing or querying.

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 explains the default dry-run behavior and how to make it send via confirm:true, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus sibling tools. Usage context is implied but not contrasted with alternatives.

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