aruba_find_invoices_without_pdd

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds the nuance 'appear to lack' indicating a heuristic filter rather than a definitive check. No contradictions with annotations. The description does not disclose further behavioral details like pagination or result format.

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 with no wasted words. It efficiently states the core purpose but omits important details about parameters and usage, striking a balance between brevity and clarity.

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 4 undocumented parameters and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain how to use the parameters, what the output represents, or any example usage. The agent would need to rely on other signals (e.g., tool name) to fill gaps.

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 0%, meaning no parameter descriptions exist in the schema. The description does not mention any of the four parameters (direction, date_from, date_to, limit) or explain how they affect results. This forces the agent to guess parameter usage, which is a critical gap for a read-only tool.

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 'Find' and the resource 'invoice list entries' with the specific criterion 'lack PDD references', distinguishing it from sibling tools like aruba_find_invoices_without_pdf_or_xml. However, 'PDD references' is not explained, so the purpose is clear but somewhat vague.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus its many siblings (e.g., aruba_search_invoices, aruba_find_duplicate_invoices). There is no mention of prerequisites or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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