get_ap_bill

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'fails loudly,' which hints at error handling but offers no specifics about read-only nature, permissions, or side effects. The output schema is present, so return format is covered, but other behavioral aspects are lacking.

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 very short with one sentence, but it includes the extraneous prefix '[Not in LCS /v1]' that may confuse or mislead. For a simple tool, minimal text is acceptable, but this could be cleaner.

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 required parameter, output schema present), the description leaves gaps. It fails to explain when to use this vs. 'list_ap_bills,' does not document the parameter, and provides minimal behavioral context. The output schema covers return values, but overall completeness is poor.

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%, so the description must compensate for the missing parameter documentation. However, the description does not mention the required 'bill_id' parameter or explain its format or constraints. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but no additional value is added.

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 'Get an AP bill,' which accurately defines the verb and resource. The name 'get_ap_bill' matches this purpose, distinguishing it from the sibling 'list_ap_bills' that returns multiple bills. However, the prefix '[Not in LCS /v1]' adds unnecessary ambiguity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling 'list_ap_bills' or other related tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name.

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