invoke_function

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the HTTP method (GET), bound/unbound behavior, and how parameters are inlined into the URL as OData arguments. It does not mention auth/error details, but the core mechanics are transparent and non-contradictory.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, followed by usage rules and parameter behavior. No filler or redundant content. Every sentence earns its place.

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 4-parameter tool with a nested parameters object and no output schema, the description adequately covers bound/unbound usage, URL inlining, and read-only scope. It could mention response format or error handling, but such details are not essential given the absence of an output schema. Overall, highly complete for its complexity.

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 each parameter already described. The description adds value by explaining the relationship between entity_set and id, and by clarifying that parameters are serialized as OData arguments. This goes beyond the schema's individual field notes.

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 tool invokes a Dataverse Web API function via GET, with bound/unbound variants. It provides concrete examples (WhoAmI, RetrieveDuplicates) that distinguish it from sibling tools like invoke_action and get_record.

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?

Explicitly states this is for read-only operations exposed as functions, and gives precise instructions on when to pass entity_set+id (bound) versus neither (unbound). This effectively differentiates from invoke_action and data-modifying tools.

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