generate_invoice_pdf

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool fetches from Wave, generates a branded PDF, and returns a path. However, it does not disclose file-system side effects (e.g., overwriting existing files), default output location, authentication requirements, or behavior when the invoice does not exist.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. The core action is front-loaded and the return value is clearly stated, making the description easy to parse quickly.

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 simple two-parameter tool without output schema, the description covers purpose and return value. However, it lacks usage guidance and important behavioral disclosures such as file creation side effects and error conditions. Since there are no annotations, these gaps make it adequate but not complete.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions ('Wave invoice ID' and 'Custom output path for PDF (optional)'), so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal parameter information beyond implying invoiceId is used to fetch and that a path is returned; it does not elaborate on default outputPath behavior.

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?

Description uses a specific verb 'generate' with a specific resource 'branded PDF' and explicitly states it fetches an invoice from Wave. It returns the path to the PDF, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_invoices, get_invoice, list_customers, and export_invoice_json—it is the only tool producing a PDF file.

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 implies its usage: when you have a Wave invoice and need a branded PDF. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it over the alternatives, such as export_invoice_json for JSON output or get_invoice for raw invoice data. No exclusions or alternative conditions are provided.

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