freeagent_delete_invoice

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

Annotations already indicate destructive and idempotent behavior; the description adds the restriction that only draft invoices can normally be deleted and that deletion is permanent, which is valuable context beyond the schema.

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?

Two sentences, both information-dense: the first states the core purpose, the second covers constraints and alternatives. No wasted words.

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 one simple parameter, no output schema, and annotations covering destructive/idempotent hints, the description sufficiently covers the operation, including the critical draft-only limitation and the alternative for non-draft invoices.

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 input schema already fully describes the single parameter (invoiceId with description and pattern). The description does not add additional parameter-specific details beyond that, so baseline 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Permanently delete') and the resource ('FreeAgent invoice'), and it distinguishes itself from sibling freeagent_update_invoice_status by mentioning the alternative for issued invoices.

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?

It explicitly states when deletion is allowed (draft invoices only) and directs users to freeagent_update_invoice_status for canceling issued invoices, providing clear when/alternative guidance.

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