recurring_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, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description's added value is that the response includes the template's line items — useful context — but it says nothing about error behavior for unknown uuids or about how generated invoices relate to the template.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that identifies the resource first and the payload second. The trailing clause 'used as a template for generated invoices' is slightly redundant and could be trimmed.

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 two-parameter, read-only fetch with no output schema and full annotation coverage, the description is adequate: it names the resource and flags that line items come back. A fuller note on what else the detail payload contains would make it complete.

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 (uuid, companyId) are documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no meaning beyond it — notably it never explains the companyId override that the schema only hints at.

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 (Get) and a precise resource (a specific recurring invoice template), plus the notable payload detail that the line items are included. It is clearly distinguishable from recurring_invoices_list by the word 'specific', though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: you call it when you have a single template and need its details. There is no statement about when to prefer recurring_invoices_list first to find the uuid, and no prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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