tochka_track_invoice

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

The description mentions persistence ('Persists across sessions') but does not disclose other behavioral traits like idempotency, error conditions, or side effects. With no annotations, more behavioral detail would improve transparency.

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: a brief statement of purpose, a sentence on persistence, guidance on related tools, and clear parameter list. No unnecessary words.

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 tool's complexity (6 parameters, 5 required) and presence of an output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains purpose, persistence, parameter meanings, and links to related tools. Minor gaps: no mention of prerequisites or return behavior.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description adds substantial meaning to each parameter with examples (e.g., 'number: Invoice number (e.g. "140")') and clear explanations (e.g., 'buyer_inn: Buyer INN (who should pay)').

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's purpose: 'Start tracking an invoice for payment.' It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'tochka_pending_invoices' (list tracked) and 'tochka_check_invoices' (check payments).

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 provides guidance on when to use this tool vs. siblings: 'Use tochka_pending_invoices to list tracked invoices, tochka_check_invoices to check payments.' However, it does not cover all alternatives or when not to use this tool.

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