tochka_download_invoice

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

The description indicates a read operation (download) with no destructive side effects, which is consistent with the openWorldHint annotation. However, it does not disclose potential limitations like file size, rewrite behavior, or network dependencies, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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?

Two sentences plus parameter lines cover everything needed. No wasted words, front-loaded with the primary action, and well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 simplicity of the tool (2 parameters, no nested objects), the description covers purpose, parameter semantics, and expected output. With an output schema available, returning to the agent is already structured, so no additional explanation is needed.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description provides crucial meaning: document_id is an invoice UUID from a specific source and output_path is an absolute file path. This fully compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 downloads an invoice PDF to a local file. It distinguishes from siblings like 'tochka_delete_invoice' and 'tochka_send_invoice_email' by focusing on the download action.

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 when you need a local PDF copy of an invoice and have a document_id from tochka_invoice. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or when-not-to-use scenarios.

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