Get Financial Invoice by Document Number

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows it is a safe, idempotent read. The description adds the optional PDF download behavior, which is useful but does not reveal any additional side effects or constraints beyond the annotations.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus bullet-pointed parameters. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and immediately provides necessary parameter details. No extraneous information.

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?

No output schema is provided, yet the description does not describe the structure of the returned financial invoice beyond the optional PDF download. For a simple retrieval tool, it is minimally sufficient but lacks details about response fields, which would help the agent understand what to expect.

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%, so the input schema fully documents both parameters with descriptions. The description repeats this information without adding extra semantic meaning (e.g., format, constraints, or examples). Baseline score of 3 applies.

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 the action: 'Returns a specific financial invoice by document number, with optional PDF download.' It specifies the resource (financial invoice) and the unique identifier (document number), distinguishing it from other get_ tools like get_consignment or get_posted_invoices.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_posted_invoices or get_carrier_invoices. The description does not mention exclusions or context for selection, leaving the agent without comparative direction.

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