get_credit_memo

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only implies read-only via the word 'Get'. It says nothing about behavior when the ID does not exist, permission or realm requirements, or whether the call is idempotent and side-effect free.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and key are stated immediately. It is arguably too terse for the gaps it leaves, but there is no wasted wording.

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 single-record getter with one parameter, the description covers the basics, and the absence of an output schema means return shape could have been sketched. It is minimally adequate but omits error and return context that would help an agent call it confidently.

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?

Only one parameter exists and schema description coverage is reported at 0%, so the description is the only place to add meaning. 'By ID' merely restates the parameter and adds no format, source, or lookup hints (e.g., where to obtain a valid Credit Memo ID).

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 states a specific verb and resource: retrieve a single credit memo, keyed by ID, from QuickBooks Online. 'Single' and 'by ID' implicitly separate it from search_credit_memos, but no sibling is named explicitly, so differentiation is left to inference.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of the obvious alternative, search_credit_memos, which sits alongside it in a very large sibling set. An agent must infer that this tool is for lookups when a Credit Memo ID is already known.

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