fiken_list_invoice_draft_attachments

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only restates the purpose without mentioning read-only nature, error handling, or authentication needs. Minimal behavioral context.

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. However, it is under-informative; conciseness should not sacrifice necessary detail. Still scores well for brevity.

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?

No output schema, no mention of return type or pagination. For a list tool, the description should indicate what the attachment list contains or any behavioral constraints. Incomplete.

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% with basic descriptions. The description adds value for companySlug by hinting to use fiken_list_companies, but draftId's description is tautological. Total added meaning is modest.

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 verb 'List', resource 'attachments', and specific context 'for a specific invoice draft'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like fiken_get_invoice_draft (gets the draft) and fiken_list_invoice_attachments (likely for invoices, not drafts).

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 fiken_list_sale_draft_attachments or fiken_get_invoice_draft. There is no mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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