square_create_invoice

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only mentions routing details and that it's a connector operation, but discloses no behavioral traits like side effects (creating an invoice), required permissions, or rate limits. The routing info is marginally helpful but insufficient.

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 short (3 lines) and front-loads the purpose. It is concise and avoids verbosity, though it sacrifices detail.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what arguments are needed or what the tool actually accomplishes. Given the single opaque parameter and the presence of sibling Square tools, more context is required for correct usage.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It states 'arguments: JSON string of arguments for the connector operation', which adds almost no meaning. The schema only defines a generic string, and the description fails to explain what the JSON should contain (e.g., customer, line items).

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 'Square connector operation create_invoice' which identifies the verb and resource, but it's vague and doesn't explicitly say 'Creates an invoice in Square'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'square_create_refund' by operation name, but the purpose is not clearly articulated.

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. The description only mentions routing through JWT/tenant/company scope but does not offer context on when to invoke create_invoice over other Square tools or what prerequisites exist.

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