freshbooks_get_invoice

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered elsewhere. The description adds only the 'numeric' qualifier and provides no additional behavioral context such as error behavior on a missing id or what happens for a non-existent invoice.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place and the resource and key are stated immediately.

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 trivial one-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and a clear readOnly annotation, this is nearly complete. It only omits any hint about the returned invoice object, which is minor since the schema fully specifies the input.

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% and the single parameter is fully described, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description repeats that the id is numeric, which the schema's integer type already conveys, and adds no new syntax or constraint detail.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('a single invoice') and identifies the lookup key as the numeric FreshBooks id. This cleanly separates it from freshbooks_list_invoices (plural listing) and from get_client/get_payment by resource.

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 by-id lookup pattern implies when to use it, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over freshbooks_list_invoices or what to do if the id is unknown. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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