It Retrieve Archived Invoice

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavior disclosure. It does disclose the return shape: document content as base64-encoded data and archive metadata. It does not mention error behavior when the document is not found, access requirements, or side effects, but the read-only nature is conveyed by 'Retrieve' and the return description adds meaningful context.

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 sentences with no filler. The action is front-loaded ('Retrieve an archived invoice'), the key input is named, and the return value is summarized efficiently.

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 with an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It states the input, the operation, and the general return content. It doesn't mention not-found behavior, but that is a minor gap given the simplicity and the presence of an output schema.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds some meaning by clarifying that document_id identifies the archived invoice, but it doesn't provide format, length, or source expectations for the identifier. Since there is only one self-explanatory parameter, this is adequate but not rich.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('archived invoice') and identifies the required key ('document_id'). It clearly differentiates this tool from its siblings: it returns the document content and metadata for a single archived invoice, unlike it__list_archived_invoices (listing) or it__verify_archive_integrity (verification).

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 implies the use case: when you need to fetch a specific archived invoice's content and metadata by its document_id. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but given the sibling set, the intended usage is reasonably clear.

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