netsuite_get_expense_report_by_external_id

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavior. It discloses the idempotency-check use case, which is useful. But it doesn't mention potential errors, return behavior when not found, permissions, or any side effects. As a simple 'get' operation, some of this is assumed, but the description lacks explicit behavioral details.

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 one concise sentence with a useful parenthetical qualifier. It is front-loaded with the core action and includes essential context without waste.

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 single-parameter getter with no output schema, this description covers the essential context: what it does, by what identifier, and a key use case. It doesn't explain the return format, but that is likely understood for a 'get' tool. Overall, it is complete for its simplicity.

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?

The schema has one parameter, externalId, with no description and 0% coverage. The tool description merely restates 'by its externalId', adding no new semantic detail beyond the parameter name itself. It is sufficient for a single self-explanatory parameter but doesn't clarify what an externalId is or any constraints like format.

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 action ('Get') and the target resource ('expense report') with a specific identifier ('externalId'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_expense_report_by_id, which uses a different identifier, and get_expense_reports, which lists multiple reports.

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 parenthetical 'idempotency check before creating an expense report' provides a clear context for when to use this tool. It implies a pre-creation check to avoid duplicates. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternative tools or when NOT to use it, so it falls short of a full 5.

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