List invoice drafts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does convey read-only intent via 'Fetch' and pagination via 'a page', but lacks detail on return format, sorting, filtering, or any side effects. It adds only marginal behavior beyond the title and name.

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 a single concise sentence with no fluff. It is appropriately sized for a simple list tool, though it is slightly too terse to include any usage guidance. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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, the description is adequate: it states the primary function and pagination is covered by the schema. However, without an output schema or annotations, there is no mention of return fields, ordering, or permission requirements, leaving some gaps for an agent to infer.

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%, so the parameters page and pageSize are fully documented with types, ranges, and defaults. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 uses the specific verb 'Fetch' with resource 'a page of draft invoices', clearly indicating a listing operation for draft invoices. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_invoice_draft (singular) and list_booked_invoices (booked vs draft), though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus other sibling tools such as get_invoice_draft or book_invoice_draft. There is no context for selecting this tool, no exclusions, and no mention of prerequisites.

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