validate_invoice_xml

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

No annotations; description only says 'validate... without sending' implying no side effects. However, it omits what validation checks are performed, error response format, and any rate limits.

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, no wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

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?

Despite having an output schema, description does not mention what the output indicates (valid/invalid, errors). With no annotations, the description should be more informative.

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?

Only one parameter 'xml_content' with schema type string. Description does not explain format, encoding, or expected content, and schema description coverage is 0%. No added meaning beyond schema.

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 the verb 'validate', the resource 'FatturaPA XML invoice', and the key qualifier 'without sending it', distinguishing it from the sibling 'send_invoice_xml'.

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?

Implied usage (validation without sending) but no explicit when-to-use or alternatives guidance. The contrast with sending is present but not elaborated.

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