list_sent_invoices

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It only mentions the action and filters, but fails to disclose behavioral traits such as pagination, sorting, rate limits, or whether results include full payloads. This is insufficient for a list endpoint.

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?

Single sentence is efficient and front-loaded with the main verb and resource. However, listing multiple filters in a run-on sentence could be better structured for readability, but overall concise.

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 5 optional parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description omits important context like pagination, default ordering, and any restrictions on filter combinations. While output schema covers return structure, behavioral details are missing.

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%, so description must add meaning. It lists five filter parameters with functional labels (company_id, identifier, committente, prestatore, file_name) but does not explain their types, formats, or how they interact. Provides basic semantics but lacks depth.

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?

Description clearly states 'List sent (outgoing) invoices' and lists specific filter criteria, distinguishing it from sibling tool 'list_received_invoices' which lists incoming invoices.

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?

Description implies when to use (listing sent invoices with filters) but does not explicitly differentiate from other sent invoice tools like 'get_sent_invoice' or 'get_sent_invoice_by_identifier'. No guidance on when not to use or prerequisites.

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