get_invoice

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

No annotations provided; description adds 'with line items' but does not disclose read-only nature, authentication requirements, or error handling. Minimum viable for a simple read operation.

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?

Single sentence, no redundant information, highly efficient. Every word is purposeful.

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?

For a simple retrieval tool with no output schema, description covers the core functionality and return inclusion (line items). Could mention full object return, but sufficient given sibling 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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for each parameter. Description adds little beyond restating that you can look up by invoiceId or invoiceNumber, which schema already covers. Baseline 3.

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?

Clear verb 'get' plus specific resource 'single invoice (with line items)' and identification methods (by invoiceID or invoice number). Distinguishes from sibling like list_invoices which returns multiple invoices.

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?

Implies usage when you need one invoice by ID/number, but no explicit when-not to use or comparison to alternatives. Adequate but not explicit.

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