teamleader_invoice_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the target of deletion but does not mention irreversibility, required permissions, or potential consequences. For a destructive action, this lack of disclosure is a significant gap.

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 a single, short sentence that immediately states the action and target. There is no redundancy or unnecessary detail, making it highly 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?

The tool has only one parameter and no output schema, so the description is relatively complete for a simple operation. However, it lacks details on error conditions (e.g., what happens if the invoice is not draft or last booked) and any side effects, which leaves minor gaps.

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?

The schema already documents 'id' as an Invoice UUID (100% coverage). The description adds meaningful context by constraining which invoices are valid (draft or last booked), thereby explaining when a particular id is acceptable. This goes beyond the schema's basic type definition.

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 uses the specific verb 'Delete' and identifies the resource 'invoice' with a clear qualifier 'draft or the last booked invoice.' This distinguishes it from other invoice-related tools (send, book, register payment) and clearly states what the tool does.

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 a clear context by specifying the exact conditions under which deletion is allowed (draft or last booked invoice). While it does not explicitly mention alternatives, the boundary is clear and no exclusions are stated, making it appropriate for most use cases.

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