lexware_download_dunning_fileDownload the PDF of a dunning document by providing its UUID. Get the original payment reminder file for review or distribution.
Download the PDF file for a dunning.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Dunning UUID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent hints, so the description's statement 'Download the PDF file' aligns without adding new behavioral insights. It does not contradict annotations but adds no extra context (e.g., file size limits, authentication needs).
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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with no wasted words. It is optimally concise for such a simple operation.
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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema) and the presence of comprehensive annotations, the minimal description is complete. It conveys all necessary information for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.
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 coverage is 100% with a single 'id' parameter described as 'Dunning UUID' and format. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 'Download' and the resource 'PDF file for a dunning', which is specific and distinct from sibling tools like lexware_download_invoice_file. It unambiguously identifies the tool's function.
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 implies use when a dunning PDF is needed, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor prerequisites or exclusions. Context signals indicate a simple tool, but no usage best practices are given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.