GetOrderInvoiceDesignSettingsPreview

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states a read operation but does not explain what happens if no custom design settings exist, or any other behavioral traits. It is insufficient.

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 sentence but has a grammatical error ('preview an Order Invoice'). It is concise but not perfectly 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?

Given no input schema, no output schema, and no annotations, the description does not fully explain the tool. It leaves out return format, prerequisites, and how it differs from similar tools.

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?

There are zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%. Baseline for 0 params is 4. The description does not need to add parameter info, but it is still clear that no inputs are required.

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 'View a preview an Order Invoice using custom design settings', which indicates a specific action on a resource. It is somewhat distinct from siblings like GetOrderInvoicePreview but the grammar is awkward and could be clearer. It provides enough purpose context.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like GetOrderInvoicePreview or GetOrderInvoicePdf. No when-not-to-use or context is provided.

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