query_purchase_orders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. 'List and filter' implies a non-mutating read operation, and the use cases add context. However, it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, return format, pagination details, or potential side effects, leaving gaps that could be filled.

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 exactly two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the core function, the second provides usage context. It is front-loaded and easily scannable.

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 simple list/filter tool with fully documented parameters, the description is mostly complete. It clearly implies a list return via 'List and filter' and covers use cases. However, since there is no output schema, explicitly stating the return structure (e.g., a list of purchase order objects) would improve completeness.

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 input schema has 100% coverage, documenting each parameter with descriptions and examples. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 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 uses the specific verb 'List and filter' with the resource 'Acumatica purchase orders', clearly indicating a query operation. It also lists concrete use cases (procurement analytics, finding open/pending POs, summarizing spend by vendor) that distinguish it from singular get_purchase_order and sales order query 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 explicitly states when to use: 'Use this for procurement analytics, finding open or pending POs, or summarizing spend by vendor.' This provides clear context but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though sibling tools like get_purchase_order imply the contrast.

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