get_next_period_numbers_expanded

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden. It describes the return structure but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, has side effects (e.g., advancing period), or requires specific permissions. The phrase 'for next period (Z22)' is ambiguous about state changes.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose and output. It is front-loaded with key information, though it could benefit from a slight expansion on usage without becoming verbose.

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 tool has only two optional parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context on typical use cases, prerequisites, or how the returned data relates to other invoice operations. A bit more detail would improve completeness.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any extra meaning or usage hints beyond what the schema already provides for the two parameters.

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 specific verbs ('Get') and clearly identifies the resource ('invoice numbers expanded per-invoice with AESKEY for next period (Z22)'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by including 'expanded' and mentioning AESKEY and random numbers, which are not in the basic get_next_period_numbers.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternative sibling tools like get_invoice_numbers or get_next_period_numbers. There is no mention of exclusions or context for when it is appropriate.

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