Create issued document

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

The description is consistent with the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, no contradiction) and adds the requirement of entity/items_list and the return value. However, it does not reveal deeper behavioral traits such as auto-creating entities by name or other side effects, which would add value beyond the 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 three concise clauses: what it does, prerequisites, and return value. Every part earns its place; no filler or redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description appropriately states that it returns the created document and explains the need for get_company_info. It covers the main use case, though nuances like entity creation by name are left to the schema, which is acceptable given the complexity.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the useful clarification that entity and items_list are required (not fully reflected in schema's required array), and points to get_company_info for ID lookups, but otherwise largely echoes schema descriptions.

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 starts with the specific verb 'Create' and identifies the resource as 'issued document' with examples (invoice, credit note, quote). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_received_document by the 'issued' qualifier, and the action is unambiguous.

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?

It explicitly states prerequisites ('Requires entity and items_list') and directs the user to get_company_info first for VAT and payment method/account IDs. This provides clear context for use, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives like update_issued_document.

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