freee_get_receipts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden for behavioral disclosure. It states a constraint ('Max 100 records per page') and explains compact mode behavior, but does not disclose pagination details, authentication needs, or any side effects (e.g., data is read-only). This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 well-structured sentences: first defines purpose and resource, second adds key behavioral notes (compact mode, limit). No redundancy or fluff. Essential information is front-loaded.

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 an 8-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers main purpose, filtering, and specific modes. However, it lacks details about the response format (e.g., what fields are returned in normal mode) and pagination behavior beyond the limit. Compact mode is explained, but normal mode output is vague.

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%, setting baseline at 3. The description adds value by highlighting filtering by date, user, and status, and explaining compact mode's purpose ('summary statistics only'). This goes beyond individual parameter descriptions, earning a score above baseline.

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 ('Get list of'), resource ('receipts'), and purpose ('for electronic bookkeeping compliance'). It specifies the content type ('receipt images/PDFs') and filtering dimensions. This distinguishes it well from sibling tools like freee_get_receipt (singular) and other listing tools.

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 mentions when to use compact mode but does not provide explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like freee_get_receipt. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated, leaving the agent to infer context from the name.

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