warp_get_invoice

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds 'Auth required' and the precondition of a delivered shipment. However, it does not disclose error behavior, rate limits, or response format beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Single sentence of 15 words, front-loaded with the purpose and key constraints. No redundant information.

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 tool with one required parameter and good annotations, the description covers purpose, precondition (delivered shipment), and auth requirement. Lacks explicit return format, but this is acceptable given no output schema.

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% and already describes the order_id parameter sufficiently. Description adds 'Auth required' but no further parameter-specific details, so value beyond schema is minimal.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves an invoice for a delivered shipment, specifying the verb 'retrieve' and resource 'invoice for a delivered shipment'. It distinguishes from siblings like warp_payment_status and warp_get_documents by focusing on invoice retrieval.

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 use only for delivered shipments but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. No guidance is provided on prerequisites or error scenarios.

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