d365fo_download_customer_invoice

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it downloads PDFs, returns a dictionary with file path, and that save_path auto-generates. It also mentions preset configurations via profile. However, it lacks details on error handling, authentication requirements, or failure modes, which are important for a download tool.

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 well-structured with sections: purpose, usage guidance, example query, and parameter list. It is front-loaded with the core action. While the example query adds length, it is valuable and not wasteful. Slightly longer than minimal but still efficient.

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 purpose and that an output schema exists (as per context signals, though not provided in full), the description covers the main workflow: query first with another tool, then use this to download. It explains parameters, provides examples, and mentions return format. It is complete for typical use, though it omits error scenarios or prerequisites.

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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description adds substantial meaning: it gives concrete examples for invoice_id and legal_entity, explains save_path's optionality and auto-generation, and describes the default for profile. This goes well beyond the bare schema, making parameter usage clear.

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 'Download a customer invoice report as PDF from D365 Finance & Operations.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling download tools by explicitly calling out 'customer invoice' and noting it is a convenience tool with preset configurations.

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 provides clear context: 'Use this when you need to quickly download customer invoices without specifying all the technical parameters.' It also gives detailed guidance on finding invoices by querying the CustInvoiceJourBiEntity through d365fo_query_entities, including an example query. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives among sibling download tools.

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