get_uninvoiced_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, any authorization requirements, rate limits, or potential side effects. While the name and context suggest a read operation, the lack of explicit behavioral cues reduces transparency.

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 consists of two concise sentences that front-load the action and purpose without any fluff or redundant information. Every sentence serves a clear function: stating the functionality and indicating its business value.

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 the lack of output schema and annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format, whether results are paginated, or how to handle potential errors. For a report tool, this information is important for correct invocation and interpretation.

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 100%, so each parameter is already documented in the input schema. The tool description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only restating the date range context. For a high-coverage schema, baseline is 3, and the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 tool generates reports of uninvoiced time and expenses within a date range, using a specific verb ('generate') and resource ('reports of uninvoiced time and expenses'). It distinguishes from sibling report tools like 'get_time_report' and 'get_expense_report' by focusing on uninvoiced items, and adds business context about identifying billable work.

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?

The description implies usage for identifying uninvoiced work but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like 'get_time_report' or 'get_expense_report'. There is no mention of when not to use it or any prerequisite conditions, leaving room for ambiguity.

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