books_email_credit_note

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

No annotations are present, and the description only states the action without detailing side effects such as whether an email is actually dispatched, whether an attachment is included by default, or whether the credit note status changes. This leaves the agent without information about consequences like email delivery, permissions, or record updates.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise in length but under-specified for a tool with 7 parameters. It lacks necessary detail, making it more under-specified than concisely informative.

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?

The tool has 7 parameters, 2 required, no output schema, and no annotations. A one-sentence description is insufficient to convey the full behavior, parameter effects, and return values. The description fails to provide an adequate context for correct invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining parameters like creditnote_id, to_mail_ids, send_attachment, and send_customer_statement. It provides no such explanation, relying solely on parameter names.

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 the verb 'Email' with the resource 'a credit note,' clearly indicating the action of sending a credit note via email. It is distinct from sibling tools like books_get_credit_notes or books_void_credit_note, and from books_send_invoice_email which targets invoices. However, it doesn't differentiate between emailing the credit note document versus a generic email with credit note information, so it is clear but not fully distinguishing.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as books_bulk_print_credit_notes or crm_send_email. No context about prerequisites (e.g., that a credit note must exist) or intended workflow is provided.

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