aruba_get_sent_invoice_by_sdi_id

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

While annotations already indicate readOnly, non-destructive, and idempotent behavior, the description adds a valuable warning about sensitivity when requesting file/PDF Base64, which exceeds the bare minimum.

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 very short and front-loads the endpoint path, which is not particularly helpful. It is concise but lacks substantial content.

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?

Despite having annotations and an output schema, the description fails to explain that the tool retrieves a sent invoice by SDI ID, nor does it describe the parameters or return value. It is incomplete for effective tool selection.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain parameters. It only hints at sensitivity related to includePdf/includeFile but does not define any parameter, including the required 'idSdi' or 'confirm_read'.

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 only states the HTTP method and path, which is not a clear statement of what the tool does. It relies on the tool name to imply retrieval of a sent invoice by SDI ID, but fails to explicitly describe the action.

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 on when to use this tool versus its many siblings, such as 'aruba_get_sent_invoice_by_filename' or 'aruba_get_sent_invoice_by_id'. There are no alternative suggestions or context for usage.

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