list_payments_applied_for_invoice

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the basic function. It does not mention pagination, ordering, error handling (e.g., if invoice not found), or whether it returns all records or limits.

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 a single concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 low complexity (1 parameter, output schema exists), the description adequately states the core function. However, it could mention that the output schema provides the return structure, but this is not required.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description only loosely ties the parameter to 'a specific invoice' without explaining the parameter's type, format, or meaning beyond what the schema's title 'Invoice Id' provides.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource as 'payment applications for a specific invoice'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_payments_applied_for_date_range or list_payments_applied_for_payment by specifying the invoice filter.

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?

The description implies usage when a specific invoice ID is known via the required parameter, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_payments_applied or list_payments_applied_for_date_range.

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