wave_create_invoice_payment

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action without disclosing behavioral traits such as whether it updates invoice status, requires permissions, or is reversible. The description lacks detail beyond the core action.

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, direct sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not mention what happens after recording (e.g., invoice balance updated, payment ID returned). A more complete description would include side effects or return behavior.

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 100% with basic descriptions like 'Invoice ID', but the tool description adds no additional meaning. It does not explain relationships between parameters (e.g., how amount relates to invoice balance) or provide context for fields like source.

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 'Record' and resource 'payment received for an invoice', making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from sibling tools like wave_create_invoice (creates invoice) and wave_create_bill_payment (payment for bills) by specifying it's for invoice payments.

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 similar tools like wave_create_bill_payment or wave_approve_invoice. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., invoice must exist) or context for using this tool over alternatives.

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