get_system_time

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

No annotations provided, but description indicates a read-only operation (get time) with no destructive or side effects. The connection test note adds transparency about intended use. Could be improved by explicitly stating idempotency or safety, but current description is adequate for a simple read.

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, complete and direct. No unnecessary words. Front-loaded with primary purpose, followed by secondary use case. Excellent efficiency.

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 parameterless tool with no output schema, description fully covers what the tool does and when to use it. The connection test note provides additional context for real-world use. No gaps in information given the tool's simplicity.

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?

Tool has zero parameters, baseline score of 4 applies. Description adds no parameter info because none exist, which is appropriate. Schema coverage is 100% (empty schema), so no additional parameter documentation needed.

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?

Description clearly states the tool gets e-invoice server system time and serves as a connection test. The verb 'Get' and specific resource 'system time' make purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_assignment_info which have different resources.

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?

Explicitly mentions connection test (Y01) which implies usage for connectivity checks. While no explicit 'when not to use' is given, the simplicity of the tool and clear purpose make it obvious when to invoke. Sibling tools are all for different operations (e.g., create, cancel, get other info), so usage boundaries are clear.

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