List Purchase Invoices

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint as false, and idempotentHint as true. The description adds that it is paginated and uses server-side filters, but lacks specifics like default page size, sorting, or 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?

The description is two sentences, each serving a clear purpose: first states purpose and key features, second provides view options and alternative tool. No redundancy or extraneous detail.

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?

For a list tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers pagination, filters, default view, and alternative. It omits details like response format and sorting, but overall is sufficient for typical use.

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 schema already describes each parameter thoroughly. The description adds minimal extra meaning by grouping filters as 'date range, status, payment status, supplier' and mentioning view='full'.

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 lists purchase invoices, mentions pagination and server-side filters, and distinguishes itself from the sibling get_purchase_invoice by specifying when to use the latter for full detail.

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 provides guidance on when to use the 'brief' vs 'full' view and when to use get_purchase_invoice instead, but does not explicitly list scenarios where the tool should not be used.

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