merit_get_sales_invoice_pdf

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return shape ('FileName + FileContent'), base64 encoding, and the delivNote behavior. The use of 'Get' and 'Returns' strongly implies a read-only operation, though it does not explicitly state safety or error behavior. This is adequate for a simple retrieval tool.

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?

Three short sentences convey the core action, return format, and parameter variant with no filler. The most important information (get PDF as base64) is front-loaded, and each sentence adds necessary detail.

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?

Despite having no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential return values ('FileName + FileContent') and the effect of the optional parameter. It could be more explicit about read-only behavior and potential errors, but for a two-parameter retrieval tool with 100% schema coverage, the description is sufficiently 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 the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema: 'Set delivNote for a delivery note without prices' essentially repeats the schema parameter description, and 'id' is not elaborated beyond being required. No significant extra value is provided.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('sales invoice PDF'), and the output format ('base64'), plus the exact endpoint. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling 'merit_get_sales_invoice' by emphasizing PDF and base64, so an agent can tell them apart without opening schemas.

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 makes clear this tool is for retrieving invoice PDFs, and the delivNote line explains a key usage variant. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the PDF/base64 emphasis provides enough contextual routing among the many siblings.

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