get_received_invoice

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

With no annotations, the description should fully disclose behavior. It only indicates a read operation ('Get') but omits details like error handling (e.g., not found), permissions, rate limits, or 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?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence with no extraneous words. It effectively communicates the core action and identifier.

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 fetch-by-ID tool with an output schema, the description is adequate but lacks orientation among siblings. It could note that this returns a detailed invoice object versus list_received_invoices returning a collection.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the parameter name 'invoice_id' is self-explanatory. The description adds the nuance 'numeric ID', providing slight clarification. However, it does not fully compensate for the lack of parameter 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 action (Get), the resource (received invoice), and the identifier (numeric ID). This distinguishes it from other sibling tools like get_sent_invoice or get_company.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_received_invoices or get_received_invoice_payload. Given the number of siblings, explicit context would be beneficial.

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