timeiq_invoice_get_by_number

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the basic operation without disclosing behavioral traits like authentication needs, error handling for missing invoices, or rate 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?

One sentence, concise and to the point. No unnecessary words, making it easy to process.

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?

Minimally adequate for a simple get-by-identifier tool. With no output schema, it doesn't explain return values or error cases. Could benefit from mentioning typical response structure or behavior if invoice not found.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by specifying the parameter as 'alphanumeric invoice number', which goes beyond the schema's generic 'string' type. However, it provides no further details on format or constraints.

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 action (Get), resource (single invoice), and method (by alphanumeric invoice number). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'timeiq_invoice_get' (likely by ID) and 'timeiq_invoice_list' (list all).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'timeiq_invoice_get' or 'timeiq_invoice_list'. There is no mention of when not to use it or any prerequisites.

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