Create a draft invoice

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool changes data (with a warning emoji), always creates a draft, honors the SEVDESK_DRY_RUN flag, and auto-fills the contact address. It does not cover authentication or rate limits, but for a creation tool, this is adequate.

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 three sentences long, each sentence adding essential information. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and uses a warning symbol for emphasis, making it efficient and scannable.

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 simplicity (no output schema, 7 parameters, 2 required), the description covers all critical aspects: what it does, key parameters, behavioral traits (draft, dry-run, data mutation), and auto-fill behavior. No gaps remain for an agent to misinterpret.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that positions require name, quantity, price, and tax rate, that the contact address is auto-filled, and that it honors dry run. This goes beyond the schema's property 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 the verb 'Create', the resource 'outgoing invoice', and specifies it is always a draft (status 50). This distinguishes it from other tools like sevdesk_list_invoices or sevdesk_mark_invoice_sent.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool (to create a draft invoice) and the important constraint that it always creates a draft. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternative tools for sending invoices.

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