get_thirdparty_invoices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states that it lists invoices and provides no information about return format, pagination, authentication, or side effects. It implies a read-only operation but doesn't confirm it.

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, clear sentence with no redundant information. It is appropriately concise and 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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema. The description explains the core functionality but omits details about the return structure or any filtering/pagination behavior. While adequate for a basic list, it could be more complete given the lack of annotations and 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?

The schema already provides 100% coverage for the `id` parameter with a description. The tool description reinforces that the ID refers to a third party but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. This aligns with the baseline score for high schema coverage.

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 ('Lister') and resource ('factures d'un tiers spécifique'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from related tools like `get_invoice` (single invoice) and `list_invoices` (all invoices) by specifying the third-party scope.

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 tool is for retrieving invoices for a specific third party, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like `list_invoices` or `get_thirdparty_orders`. No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned, leaving usage to be inferred.

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