aruba_find_missing_notifications

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, so the tool is clearly safe and non-destructive. The description adds no further behavioral context beyond the one-line purpose, but given the annotations, it is adequate.

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 clear sentence that conveys the main purpose efficiently. It is front-loaded and contains no filler, though it could benefit from additional details without becoming verbose.

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?

With 6 paramers and no descriptions, the description is insufficient for proper tool usage. It does not hint at parameter roles or expected output, leaving a significant gap, especially given the number of siblings and context.

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%, meaning no parameter descriptions exist. The tool description does not explain any of the 6 parameters (direction, date_from, date_to, expected_final_status, limit, confirm_read), so the agent has no idea what they do or how to use them.

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 it finds invoices missing expected final SDI notifications, which is a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools like aruba_find_duplicate_invoices or aruba_find_invoices_without_pdd by focusing on missing notifications.

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 alternatives. The description does not specify under what conditions to use it or what the prerequisites are, leaving the agent without context for decision-making.

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