create_invoice

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

The description indicates the tool creates a draft invoice, which is a non-destructive action. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden; it adequately conveys the behavioral trait of creating a draft without further side effects.

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 sentences front-load the purpose and provide workflow guidance without any unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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?

The description covers the creation workflow and distinguishes from siblings, but does not mention return values (e.g., invoice ID) or prerequisites (e.g., customer existence). Given the absence of an output schema, a mention of return value would enhance completeness.

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 has 100% description coverage for all 7 parameters. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Create a new draft invoice (without lines)', which specifies the verb (create), resource (new draft invoice), and scope (without lines). It distinguishes from sibling 'create_invoice_with_lines' and fits the workflow.

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 explicitly instructs to use add_invoice_line for lines and publish_invoice to finalize, providing clear when-to-use and alternative steps.

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