Get sales invoice PDF

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds meaningful behavior by specifying that the PDF is returned as a base64-encoded string and mentions the endpoint, which is beyond the annotations. No contradictions found.

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 compact – a title line, a concise explanation of the output format, and an endpoint reference. There is slight redundancy between the title and the first sentence, but overall every sentence contributes information without fluff.

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 download operation with a fully documented schema and safety-bearing annotations, the description covers the essential behavior (base64 return, endpoint). It doesn't describe error cases or pagination, but these are less critical for a single-resource PDF fetch, and the absence of an output schema is acceptable here.

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 all parameters (id, save_path, administration) are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no extra parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, matching the baseline for high coverage.

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 a specific verb ('Download') and resource ('PDF of a sales invoice'), and notes the return format as base64. It distinguishes from siblings like get_sales_invoice by focusing on the PDF artifact, though it doesn't explicitly compare against other PDF tools (e.g., get_sales_order_pdf).

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 intended use is implied: when you need the PDF version of a sales invoice, use this tool. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives (e.g., use get_sales_invoice for structured data), leaving the agent to infer from name and description.

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