listInvoices

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full burden. It mentions pagination and filtering, implying read-only behavior. However, it does not disclose details like result format, default sort order, or absence of side effects, which are important for a tool with 19 parameters.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. It is efficient and free of fluff, but lacks separate sections for usage guidance, which could improve clarity.

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 no output schema, the description minimally states it returns a list of invoices. For a tool with 19 parameters and pagination, more detail on response structure and pagination behavior would be beneficial, but the description is adequate for a basic list operation.

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 input schema already documents all parameters. The description adds a high-level summary of filter categories but does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 the action ('retrieve a paginated list'), the resource ('invoices'), and highlights filtering options. This distinguishes it from single-invoice retrieval tools like getInvoiceById and generative tools like generateInvoice.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use listInvoices versus alternatives (e.g., getInvoiceById for a single invoice, or other list tools). No exclusions or preferred contexts are mentioned.

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