search_invoices

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. It discloses supplier partial match and auto-uppercase, but does not mention auth needs, rate limits, read-only nature, or response format. Could be more transparent about side effects.

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?

Description is concise with three examples. No filler sentences; each line serves a purpose. Front-loaded with tool purpose.

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?

Covers main use cases with examples. Missing details about limit/offset pagination and how to combine parameters. Output schema absent, but acceptable for a search tool. Mostly complete.

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 78% schema coverage, baseline is 3. Description adds practical semantics via examples (e.g., using supplier 'google' finds invoices from Google) and details like 'automatically uppercased' for supplier. This exceeds 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 it searches 'Accounts Payable invoices in Oracle Fusion.' It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_ar_invoices (AR invoices) and search_purchase_orders. Examples illustrate specific use cases.

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?

Examples show when to use each parameter (supplier, invoice_number, date range). However, no explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives among the 29 sibling search tools. The context is clear but lacks exclusions.

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