sales_invoice_generate

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

No annotations exist; description lacks disclosure of side effects (e.g., persistence, email sending) or error handling. Only states it creates a draft, but behavior beyond that is unclear.

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?

Three sentences with clear flow: context, action, warning. Could omit 'Station 4' if not universally meaningful, but otherwise 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?

Has output schema so return details are handled; description covers input and intention. Lacks workflow steps or error conditions, making it adequate but incomplete.

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 100% so baseline 3. Description adds context like 'due date based on payment terms' and 'tax calculation', but does not deeply explain parameter interactions.

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?

Description clearly states 'Generate invoice data from an order' and specifies it creates a 'draft invoice', distinguishing from final invoice tools. Sibling tools like sales_order_convert handle different aspects.

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?

Mentions 'Station 4' implying a workflow but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use. Lacks prerequisites or alternatives, though the context of other sales tools provides some comparison.

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