scan_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 a payment requirement, which is a key behavioral trait, but lacks details on error handling, rate limits, output format, or processing time. For a tool with no annotations and complex functionality, this 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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by a critical requirement. Every word serves a clear function, with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration, making it highly 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 no annotations, no output schema, and a tool that performs a complex operation (invoice scanning with payment), the description is incomplete. It misses details on output structure, error cases, and operational constraints, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to use it effectively.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents the three parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying the 'signature' parameter relates to payment, but this is minimal. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles most of the parameter documentation.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('scans') and resource ('invoice'), specifying file formats (PDF/JPG/PNG) and outcome ('extracts structured data'). It doesn't distinguish from sibling tools, but none appear to be direct alternatives for invoice scanning, making this adequate.

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 mentions a requirement ('Requires payment (X402)'), which provides some usage context, but it doesn't specify when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., if 'create_invoice' or other siblings are related), nor does it provide exclusions or clear scenarios for application.

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