it__retrieve_archived_invoice

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the main behavior: returns base64-encoded content and archive metadata. However, it omits side effects, error behavior for missing IDs, or any authorization constraints — though for a read operation, the basic behavior is adequately stated.

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?

One concise sentence with no filler, front-loading the action and resource, then stating the return content. It is efficiently structured and easy to scan.

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 single-parameter retrieval tool, the description is essentially complete with the output schema and the clear mention of returned base64 and metadata. Minor gaps remain around possible failure cases and where document_id comes from, but the core usage context is adequately covered.

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 schema has zero description coverage, and the description only repeats the parameter name ('document_id') without explaining its format, origin, or how it relates to archive operations. It adds no meaning beyond the schema's property name and type.

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 the specific action 'Retrieve' and resource 'archived invoice', and the key qualifier 'by its document_id'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like it__list_archived_invoices, which lists invoices without retrieving an individual document.

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 intended use is implied by 'by its document_id' — you should call this when you have a known archived document ID. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it, nor does it point to alternatives such as it__list_archived_invoices for discovery or it__verify_archive_integrity for validation.

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