get_customer_statement

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions the content (invoices, payments, balance) but does not disclose behavioral details like date range filtering, whether the balance is current or date-specific, or the return structure. The read-only nature is only implied by the tool name.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the main purpose. It is efficient and contains no redundant 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?

Given the lack of output schema, annotations, and schema descriptions, plus three parameters, the one-line description is insufficient. It does not explain the date range concept, the meaning of the balance, or how this tool fits among the many related financial tools, making it hard for an agent to invoke correctly.

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%, and the description does not explain the three parameters (thirdparty_id, date_start, date_end). It only implies thirdparty_id via 'd'un client' but provides no meaning for the date fields or their optionality, leaving the agent to infer their purpose.

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 tool returns a complete customer statement (invoices, payments, balance) with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_thirdparty_invoices or get_aged_balance by emphasizing the comprehensive nature of the statement.

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 usage for obtaining a full customer statement but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_thirdparty_invoices or get_financial_summary. No exclusions or alternative references are given.

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