list_overdue_invoices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the read-only listing behavior and optional filters, but doesn't mention return format, pagination, or how 'overdue' is defined. For a simple list operation, this is adequate but sparse.

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: the first states the purpose and filters, the second gives the usage trigger. No unnecessary words, well-structured.

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?

The tool is simple with 3 optional parameters, but the description only covers two of them, and there is no output schema or annotations. It lacks details about the 'limit' parameter and return structure, making the description incomplete for a fully informed invocation.

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 has 0% description coverage. The description mentions 'client' and 'minimum amount' but omits the 'limit' parameter entirely, and provides no additional semantic details about what 'client' refers to or how 'min_amount' is applied.

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?

Description states 'List overdue invoices only' – a specific verb and resource, and 'only' clearly scopes it to overdue invoices. This distinguishes it from siblings like search_invoices and search_paid_invoices by focusing on overdue status.

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?

Concludes with 'Use when the user asks which invoices are overdue or past due.' This provides a clear trigger for when to use the tool, but it doesn't explicitly list alternatives or when not to use it.

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