get_receipt

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description only adds that the response includes receipt data and optionally a PDF, without noting permission requirements, error/not-found behavior, or that PDF inclusion is opt-in.

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?

A single compact sentence with the key lookup mechanism front-loaded and no filler. It is arguably over-terse for a tool that returns two distinct payloads, but nothing is wasted.

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?

With annotations and full schema coverage the call mechanics are clear, but there is no output schema, so the description is the only place to describe the returned data shape (and it merely says 'Data and PDF'). For a retrieval tool with two return modes, that leaves a meaningful gap.

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 all three parameters (company, includePdf, receiptNumber) are already documented in the schema, including the company default and list_companies reference. The description adds only the receipt-number lookup framing, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (get) and resource (receipt) plus the lookup key (receipt number), and 'Data and PDF' signals it returns both structured data and a document. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings such as get_invoice_data/get_invoice_pdf or clarify its relationship to create_receipt/send_receipt.

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 versus list_invoices/other siblings, no prerequisites, and no statement about what happens if the receipt number is unknown. Usage must be inferred entirely from the name.

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