List external sales invoices

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds non-obvious behavioral context: the default period is the current financial year and older data requires an explicit filter period. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded and the second sentence delivers the most decision-relevant behavioral detail about the default period.

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?

For a read-only list tool with four optional, fully documented parameters and rich annotations, the description covers the main non-obvious behavior. It could have explicitly routed regular invoices to list_sales_invoices, but the external scope is already unambiguous.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning to the filter parameter by explaining the period default and how to override it with an explicit period. It does not discuss page, per_page, or administration_id, but those are already fully documented in the schema.

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 and resource: 'List revenue invoiced outside Moneybird'. The 'outside Moneybird' qualifier clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like list_sales_invoices and aligns with get_external_sales_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?

It gives clear usage context by mentioning webshops/POS and explicitly warns about the current-financial-year default with an instruction to pass an explicit period. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion rules, so it stops short of a 5.

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