validate_cii_invoice

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

No annotations, but description thoroughly explains internal parsing to EN16931Invoice, checks for required fields, and output structure with success/failure/parse error scenarios.

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?

Concise description with front-loaded purpose, followed by essential details. Every sentence adds value; no wasted words.

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 one parameter, no annotations, and an output schema in the description, the tool is fully specified. Covers behavior, limitations, and return format.

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 clear description for xml_string. Description could clarify the root element requirement but repeats schema info. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description explicitly states 'Validate a CII CrossIndustryInvoice XML string for structural correctness', specifying verb, resource, and scope. Distinguishes from sibling tools like validate_ubl_invoice.

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?

Explicitly notes that the tool does NOT validate against the normative CII D16B XSD schema and recommends dedicated CII or ZUGFeRD validators for full schema validation.

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