get_bills_receivable

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

The description correctly implies a read operation, consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation. It adds the context that Bills Receivable are outstanding and date-specific. However, it does not detail what 'outstanding' means, whether the result is paginated, or if there are any limits, but given annotations handle the idempotency, a 3 is fair.

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, concise sentence that conveys the essential purpose without extraneous words. It front-loads the action and resource, making it efficient for an AI agent to parse.

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 has only one simple parameter (well-documented), a readOnly annotation, and no output schema, the description is adequate. It covers the core functionality, though it could be slightly more complete by clarifying what 'outstanding' entails or how the output is structured.

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 is exactly one parameter (asOf) and its description in the schema is already clear: 'As-of date in DD-MM-YYYY format'. The description in the tool description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema's description. With 100% schema coverage, baseline 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 tool retrieves 'outstanding Bills Receivable' from TallyPrime, as of a given date. It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('Bills Receivable'), and the as-of date condition distinguishes it from generic list 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 implies the tool should be used to get outstanding bills receivable as of a specific date. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus sibling tools like 'get_bills_payable' or 'get_vouchers', nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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