Settings: get debitors

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is largely covered. The description adds genuinely useful scope context: there is no delete endpoint for debtors, so lifecycle is create/list/update only. Beyond that it adds little, and it does not mention pagination defaults or result ordering.

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?

Front-loads the read-only guarantee and the core purpose, then routing guidance and pagination notes. Minor redundancy: '**get debitors**' repeats the title and the READ-ONLY banner partially duplicates readOnlyHint, but no sentence is harmful.

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 only two optional params, an output schema, and full annotation coverage, the description supplies everything needed to select and call the tool. It does not describe return volume or what identifier fields are returned, but the output schema handles that.

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% and both parameters (limit, offset) are fully documented with defaults. The description only restates 'Supports `limit` and `offset`' without adding format, max value, or pagination semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get all debitors' / 'list customers') and explicitly frames the output as debtor records used for name→id resolution. It is clearly separable from sibling tools like creditors_list and debtors_create without opening a schema.

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?

Gives a concrete usage scenario (resolve a customer name to the `debtor` id that receipt/posting tools expect) and names the alternative for the opposite case ('For suppliers you buy from, use `creditors_list`'). Exclusion and routing are explicit.

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