Get Receipt Options

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

The annotations provide a strong safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), making the description's general claim of 'getting options' consistent with behavior. The description does not add new behavioral constraints beyond this implied read-only nature.

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, dense sentence that completely defines the tool's utility and its specific domain without using filler.

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?

It thoroughly explains the business value and the scope of the options returned, which is essential given the large number of similar-named receipt tools in the sibling list.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage and a clear schema, the baseline for parameter semantics is met. The description does not add logic that is missing from the structured data.

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 lists three specific sets of data retrieved (categories, payment methods, approval rights). Crucially, it ties these categories to specific sibling tools (update_receipt / create_receipt), allowing the agent to distinguish this tool's purpose and scope immediately.

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 description implies usage by explicitly linking its output to the requirements of the update_receipt and create_receipt workflows. The optional 'company' parameter provides the necessary context for targeted usage.

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