List Fortnox Voucher Series

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds value by specifying the return fields (code, description, manual entries allowed) and the domain purpose, which goes beyond the annotations.

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 well-structured with a one-line summary, a contextual note, and clear Args/Returns sections. It is concise but includes a slight redundancy by re-stating the parameter description already present in the schema.

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?

For a simple list tool with no output schema, the description is adequately complete: it states what it returns and explains the domain. It does not mention pagination or whether all series are returned, but given openWorldHint and the likely small set, this is a minor gap.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter response_format, including enum and default. The description merely repeats the schema's explanation ('Output format: markdown or json'), adding no new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 states 'List available voucher series in Fortnox' with a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like fortnox_list_vouchers by focusing on voucher series, and adds explanatory context about their purpose.

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 by explaining that voucher series categorize vouchers, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. No sibling tool is named as an alternative.

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