Get Carrier Invoices

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the 'max 100 records per call' limit, which is a useful behavioral constraint. However, it does not clarify what 'basic information' includes or if there is any pagination mechanism beyond the limit.

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?

The description is concise: one sentence stating the purpose and limit, followed by a clear list of optional parameters. Every part is necessary, and the key info is front-loaded.

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 4 optional parameters, no output schema, and annotations present, the description covers the main points: purpose, filter parameters, and record limit. However, it lacks details on default behavior (e.g., what happens if no filters are provided), sorting, or whether the 100 record limit implies pagination. It feels minimally adequate but not comprehensive.

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 description's Args section largely duplicates the schema's parameter descriptions. It adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema provides, so 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?

The description clearly states it returns basic carrier invoice information with a max 100 record limit. It uses a specific verb-resource combination. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'machship_get_carrier_invoice_entries', though the tool name itself is distinctive.

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 lists filter parameters but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'machship_get_invoice_by_document_number' or 'machship_get_posted_invoices'. There is no mention of when not to use it or recommended contexts.

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