merit_get_sales_invoice

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it discloses useful behavior: endpoint (POST /api/v2/getinvoice), returned content (rows and payments), and the base64 PDF payload with a 'large' warning. It doesn't discuss auth or error cases, but 'Get' plus these details make behavior predictable enough.

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?

Two tight sentences, with the main purpose first and parameter guidance second. No redundant words; the endpoint and size warning each earn their place.

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 2-parameter read tool, the description covers what is returned, the id source, and the optional heavy attachment. It is missing an explicit cross-reference to get_sales_invoice_pdf for PDF-only needs, which would make it fully 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds value by explaining id as the SIHId GUID from list tools and specifying that addAttachment returns the invoice PDF as base64 and may be large. This is more than the schema's generic descriptions.

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 'Get one Merit Aktiva sales invoice with rows and payments' – a specific verb, resource, and content scope. 'One' explicitly distinguishes it from list siblings, and including rows/payments sets it apart from PDF-only 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?

Tells the agent where the id comes from ('SIHId from the list tools') and how to request the PDF ('Set addAttachment'), giving clear invocation context. It does not explicitly name the alternative get_sales_invoice_pdf or state when not to use this tool, so it falls just short of a 5.

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