list_invoices

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds no new behavioral details such as pagination behavior, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The presence of pagination parameters (page, per_page) is not reflected in the description.

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?

Three short, focused sentences. First sentence states the primary purpose immediately. No redundant or unnecessary text. Highly efficient.

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 8 parameters and no output schema, the description explains core functionality (list with filters, key return fields) but omits pagination and sorting behavior. Adequate for basic use but incomplete for advanced scenarios.

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?

The description covers main filtering parameters (date_start, date_end, customer_id, status) and mentions return fields (customer, amount, due_date). With 63% schema description coverage, the description adds some context (e.g., organization_id fallback to env var) but omits sort_column, page, per_page. Baseline at moderate coverage.

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 tool lists customer invoices (accounts receivable) with filtering support, distinguishing it from single-invoice retrieval (get_invoice) and other list tools (list_bills, list_expenses).

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 mentions filtering by date, customer, and status, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over alternatives like list_bills or when not to use it. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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