jobber_list_invoices

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full responsibility for behavior. It discloses the output fields and that filtering is possible, but it does not mention pagination behavior, the meaning of the `after` cursor, or any rate limits, leaving an agent to infer how the returned list is delivered.

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 two concise sentences, front-loading the core 'list invoices' purpose and important output fields before the optional filter detail. Every word earns its place.

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 optional-filter list tool, the description provides the essential purpose and visible output fields, while the schema covers parameter details. The absence of an output schema and any mention of pagination in the description leaves a small gap, but the tool is still callable.

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%: all three parameters are already fully described in the schema. The description only restates the status filter and its enum values, adding no new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('List invoices from Jobber') and enumerates the returned fields (amount, payment status, client info), making its purpose unmistakable and clearly distinct from sibling list tools like jobber_list_clients or jobber_list_jobs.

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 clearly implies this is the tool for retrieving invoice data and optionally narrowing by status, and the sibling list makes resource separation obvious. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives, 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.