Get open A/R invoices

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds real value by spelling out the unpaid-balance formula, but says nothing about ordering, pagination behavior, or what happens when no filters are supplied.

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?

A single tight sentence that front-loads the resource and immediately defines the balance calculation, with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple read tool, though the parenthetical formula slightly interrupts the flow.

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 three-parameter read-only listing tool with a fully described schema and no output schema, the definition covers what the tool returns (invoices plus unpaid balance) and the optional narrowing options. Only minor gaps remain, such as default sort order or maximum result behavior.

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 all three parameters are already documented, including limits and the HANA case-sensitivity note. The description only loosely restates customer and overdue filtering and adds no format or edge-case detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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?

Names a specific resource (open A/R invoices) and defines the key computed field as DocTotal - PaidToDate, which tells an agent exactly what it will get back. It is less explicit about how it differs from close siblings like get_customer_balance or get_open_sales_orders, so it stops short of a 5.

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 phrase 'optionally for one customer or only overdue ones' hints at when the optional parameters apply, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of the sibling tools (e.g. get_customer_balance, get_open_sales_orders) that an agent might otherwise pick.

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