hostkit_generate_saft

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Generate' but does not explain side effects (e.g., overwriting existing files), required permissions, or what the tool returns. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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?

A single, complete sentence that front-loads the key action and resource. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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?

The tool generates a file but has no output schema and the description omits return details (e.g., a link, file ID, or success message). The description is too minimal to fully contextualize the operation, especially given the absence of annotations and the existence of a retrieval sibling.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it rephrases 'invoicing nif' from the schema but does not clarify formats or constraints.

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 'Generate a SAF-T file for an invoicing account' clearly identifies the action (generate), the resource (SAF-T file), and the context (for an invoicing account). It distinguishes from sibling tool hostkit_get_saft, which likely retrieves an existing file.

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 like hostkit_get_saft. The description does not indicate prerequisites or contexts such as whether an invoice period must be closed first.

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