invoice_processing__list_finance_outgoing_services

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description doesn't need to state safety. It adds value by disclosing the rate-limit constraint (not iikoCloud limit but MCP-server throttling) and advising caching. This is behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose, then follows with critical usage details. The rate-limit warning is highly action-relevant for agents and earns its place.

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 simple schema and the presence of read-only annotations, the description covers the essentials: purpose, parameter source, and rate limiting. It doesn't describe return format, but no output schema exists, so this is a minor gap. Overall, it's strong but not exhaustive.

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%, but the tool has only one parameter (request wrapper) with three fields (from, to, organizationId) that are self-explanatory from their schema descriptions (dates and GUID). The description adds the 'period' framing but no additional syntax details, so it's minimal but adequate given the simple schema.

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 'Список актов расхода услуг за период' (list of expense service acts for a period), which is a specific verb+resource+scope. It distinguishes this tool from its siblings like list_finance_incoming_services (incoming vs outgoing) and list_inventory_outgoing_invoices (inventory vs finance).

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 explicitly tells the agent where to get the organizationId (from organizations__get_organizations) and provides rate-limit guidance (throttling: max 10 requests per 60s, cache results). This exceeds basic usage guidance.

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