get_invoices

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile, and the description adds 'optional pagination' as a behavioral trait. However, it does not describe pagination defaults, return shape, or any operational constraints.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the core action, with every phrase earning its place by naming the available filters.

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?

For a read-only list operation with five optional parameters, the description covers all parameter categories and the read-only behavior is covered by annotations. It lacks explicit return-format or pagination-default details, but these are not critical for a simple list tool.

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 compensates by mapping all five parameters to meaningful groups: pagination (page/limit), search, status, and customer. It adds purpose beyond the raw property types, though it does not define exactly what 'search' matches.

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 the verb and resource, 'List invoices', and enumerates the key filter dimensions. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from get_invoice or get_customer_invoices, leaving the all-customer scope implicit.

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?

'List invoices' directly signals the general listing use case, and the optional filters tell an agent how to narrow results. It does not mention when not to use it or direct the agent to get_customer_invoices for a customer-scoped list.

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