merit_list_sales_invoices

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds non-obvious context: the Merit API rejects periods longer than 3 months, and dateType 0 is the default. It does not mention pagination or response shape, but for a list read operation this is a minor gap.

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 and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed only by essential operational constraints. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no redundant or promotional language.

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 5-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description plus the fully documented schema gives an agent enough to invoke it correctly: required period fields, date format, range limit, and default dateType. It lacks explicit output/pagination details, but the core calling context is 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?

The input schema already covers all 5 parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a small amount of value by calling out the 3-month limit, the enforced rejection, and the default for dateType, but it largely restates schema information.

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 action ('List') and resource ('Merit Aktiva sales invoices') scoped to a period, and includes the exact API endpoint. This distinguishes it from siblings like merit_list_sales_invoices_by_number_or_customer and merit_get_sales_invoice.

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 when a period-based invoice list is needed, and names no alternative. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or point to more specific siblings, so usage guidance is only implied rather than explicit.

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