list_invoices

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, any side effects, authorization requirements, or rate limits. Only the function name and parameters imply a read operation, but this is not explicit.

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 extremely concise: a one-line summary followed by a bulleted list of arguments. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy or fluff. Ideal for quick agent scanning.

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?

Given the output schema exists (so return structure is documented), the input parameters are covered well. The description explains optional filters and pagination hints. It lacks explicit mention of default behavior (e.g., returns all invoices if no filters) or sorting, but is otherwise sufficient for a list operation.

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?

The description adds meaning to all 4 parameters: status values are enumerated, debtor_code and modified_since are explained as filters, and limit_pages is described as a page cap. This supplements the schema which had no descriptions (0% coverage). The missing format for modified_since (ISO date) is relatively clear.

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 clearly states 'List invoices' with optional filters. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_invoice (single invoice) and list_credit_invoices (different resource) by resource name and parameter differences. However, it does not explicitly contrast with closely related siblings.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_invoice or list_credit_invoices. There are no exclusions or context hints for appropriate usage.

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