Create Invoice

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

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds useful behavioral details: auto-generated invoice number, default draft status, today's date, and support for IRPF, equivalence surcharge, series, prepayment, and discount. No contradictions with annotations.

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 brief (two sentences plus example and Spanish translation). Key info is front-loaded. The Spanish section is somewhat redundant for English agents but does add completeness for a bilingual context. Could be slightly more streamlined.

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 19 parameters, full schema coverage, an output schema, and annotations, the description covers the essential creation workflow. It details defaults and special features. It does not elaborate on the output schema, but that is separated. Adequate for 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% with descriptions for all 19 parameters. The description adds meaning beyond the schema via an example and references to supported features (IRPF, recargo, etc.), enhancing understanding of how parameters work together.

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 'Create a new invoice' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like create_credit_note by emphasizing requirements (client name and line items) and auto-generation. The example further clarifies usage.

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 description specifies when to use the tool (create a new invoice) and what is required (client name, at least one line item). It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, but the context of siblings like create_credit_note implies the distinction.

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