Generate invoices for multiple orders in one batch to automate billing tasks.
Generate an Order Invoice batch
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "GenerateBatchOrderInvoice"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | No | Request body |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, and the description merely repeats the name. It fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions, rate limits, or idempotency. For a tool with no annotations, this is severely lacking.
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 short sentence with no wasted words. However, it is too concise to be useful, lacking essential details. It is not verbose, but under-specification reduces its effectiveness.
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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description should compensate. It does not explain what a 'batch' means, how the tool works, input requirements, or expected outcomes, leaving the agent with insufficient context.
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 only parameter 'body' is simply described as 'Request body', adding no meaningful detail beyond the schema. Although schema coverage is 100%, the description does not clarify the expected structure or fields, so it fails to aid the agent.
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 states the verb 'Generate' and resource 'Order Invoice batch', clearly indicating the action. It distinguishes from sibling 'GenerateOrderInvoice' by including 'batch', but doesn't explicitly clarify the distinction.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like GenerateOrderInvoice or GetOrderInvoicePdf. The description lacks context for appropriate usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.