Create Purchase Invoice

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

The description reveals behaviors beyond annotations: it states that vat_price and gross_price are required because confirm_purchase_invoice fails without them, and that base_* values may lock actual EUR settlement. Annotations show readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, which are consistent with creating a draft.

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 is concise, two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. It packs important guidelines efficiently, though the dense format may require careful parsing.

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 tool's complexity (18 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the main contract conditions and dependencies. However, it does not explain the overall process (create draft then confirm) or what the return value is, leaving some context gaps.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description adds extra meaning: e.g., 'Required — confirm_purchase_invoice fails without it' for vat_price/gross_price, and 'auto-derived from currency_rate when omitted' for base_* fields. This goes beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 'Create a draft purchase invoice' and provides specific details about the direct-call contract, differentiating it from sibling tools like create_purchase_invoice_from_pdf (which creates from PDF) and confirm_purchase_invoice (which confirms).

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 gives explicit conditions: 'pass exact invoice vat_price/gross_price' and 'non-EUR requires cl_currencies_id + currency_rate'. It implies when to use this tool but does not explicitly mention alternatives like create_purchase_invoice_from_pdf for when PDF is available.

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