xero_aged_receivable_report

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, destructive potential, authentication requirements, or rate limits. The agent is left unaware of the tool's safety profile.

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 but wastes space repeating the tool name and platform designation. The 'Routes through' line is likely irrelevant for an agent. It lacks clear structure and does not front-load critical purpose information.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema exists), the description should explain what the report contains and how it behaves. Instead, it omits all substantive context, leaving the agent without sufficient information to invoke it correctly.

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 only parameter 'arguments' is described as 'JSON string of arguments for the connector operation,' which is tautological and adds no meaning beyond the schema. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to explain expected JSON structure or provide examples.

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 provides the tool name ('aged_receivable_report') and states it's a Xero connector operation, but fails to explain what this report does (e.g., lists overdue customer invoices). It does not distinguish it from sibling 'xero_aged_payable_report', leaving ambiguity about its function.

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 is given on when to use this tool, what prerequisites are needed, or how it differs from alternatives like 'xero_aged_payable_report' or other Xero report tools. The description offers no decision-making support.

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