delete_invoice_attachment

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

The description clarifies that the action removes the file association, not necessarily the underlying file. Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the description adds nuance without contradicting annotations. However, it does not disclose irreversibility, required permissions, or error behavior.

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 short, direct sentences with no extraneous information. Every word adds value.

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 simple delete tool, the description is adequate but missing return value information (e.g., whether it returns success or the deleted attachment). Without an output schema, the agent might need to know if the operation is successful.

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 both parameters (organization_id and invoice_id). The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline.

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 the action (delete) and the resource (attachment from an invoice), and additionally explains that it removes the file association. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that delete attachments from other entities (e.g., delete_bill_attachment).

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 alternatives like delete_bill_attachment or get_invoice_attachment first. There is no mention of prerequisites or conditions.

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