ls_generate_order_invoice

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

Annotations indicate idempotent and non-destructive behavior, which the description aligns with by stating a PDF generation. However, the description does not disclose additional side effects (e.g., email sending, storage persistence) or constraints like 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with main action and output. No redundant or unclear phrases. Highly compact.

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?

While the description covers the primary action, it omits details such as default behavior for optional parameters, URL expiration, or error conditions. Given the complexity (9 parameters) and no output schema, more context would benefit the agent.

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 has 100% description coverage, so the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's field descriptions. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate since schema already explains parameters adequately.

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 'Generate a PDF invoice for an order' and specifies the output is a download URL. It distinguishes from siblings like ls_generate_subscription_invoice by focusing on orders, and from ls_get_order by the generating action.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. No prerequisites mentioned (e.g., order existence). The context is implied by the name and description, but no when-not or alternative references are provided.

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