Describe a sevDesk API operation

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value by disclosing what the call returns (parameter list, request-body shape, example call) and framing it as a prerequisite step. It stops short of saying whether the spec is live or cached, or anything about auth.

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?

Two sentences, both load-bearing: the first says what comes back, the second says when to use it. The usage rule is front-loaded as an imperative, which is the right emphasis for a lookup tool.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing return values and does so adequately by enumerating the three artifacts returned. For a one-parameter, open-world spec lookup this is nearly complete; only the freshness/source of the spec is unstated.

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% and the operationId field already says it must be the exact ID as returned by sevdesk_list_operations. The description only restates 'one operationId', adding no format or sourcing detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: shows the parameter list, request-body shape and an example call for a single operationId. The reference to sevdesk_call helps an agent separate it from the actual invocation, though it never explicitly contrasts with sevdesk_list_operations, which is the closest lookalike.

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?

'Always do this before sevdesk_call on an operation you have not used before' gives an explicit trigger condition and names the alternative tool it precedes. Nothing about when to reach for this versus the siblings is left to inference.

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