teamleader_invoice_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It only says 'Get details' without disclosing permissions, return format, error behavior, or what 'details' includes. This adds little beyond the tool name and schema.

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, concise sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded. It is efficient, though somewhat under-specified, but not tautological or bloated.

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 simple get-by-ID tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose. However, it lacks behavioral details and usage guidance, which is a gap given no annotations to complement it.

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 input schema fully describes the 'id' parameter as 'Invoice UUID' (100% coverage). The description merely restates 'by ID' without adding extra meaning, so baseline 3 applies per schema coverage.

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 details'), resource ('specific invoice'), and method ('by ID'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like the invoice list or invoice action tools.

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 context is clear: use this tool when you have a specific invoice ID and need details. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the 'by ID' phrasing implies the intended usage.

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