proforma_invoices_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds useful context about the returned details, including line items, client information, and totals, but does not mention error behavior, permissions, or not-found handling.

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 efficient sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and scope. Every part of the sentence contributes useful information with no wasted wording.

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 read-only get operation with complete schema coverage and annotations covering safety traits, the description is largely complete. It describes the returned content even though there is no output schema, though it could say more about error cases or authentication requirements.

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%, so both the uuid and companyId parameters are already documented in the schema. The description does not add further parameter semantics beyond what the structured input schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: "Get complete details for a specific proforma invoice," and lists what is included. It clearly distinguishes retrieving one invoice from listing invoices, though it does not explicitly name the sibling list tool.

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?

The usage is implied by "specific proforma invoice" and the required UUID parameter, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus proforma_invoices_list or how to obtain the UUID. No exclusions or alternatives are stated.

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