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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and 'Changes nothing' reinforces the read-only contract. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context by disclosing the returned fields (status, amount, sessionId) and the limit cap of 1 to 100, though it says nothing about pagination/page-walking or auth requirements.

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 tight sentences with purpose front-loaded, followed by return content, filtering, and a closing safety note. No wasted words, though the enumerated return fields and filter options slightly overlap with the schema.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully explains return contents, and it covers the filtering and size options for a zero-required-param list tool. The main gap is pagination behavior (whether other pages exist beyond the limit), which is not addressed anywhere.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters (limit, status enum, business) are already documented in the schema. The description echoes the status enum values and limit range but adds no new syntax or semantics, so it sits at the baseline 3.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ('List checkout sessions') and states the returned fields (status, amount, sessionId), so an agent can tell it apart from agenta_pay_get and agenta_pay_checkout by intent. It stops short of naming those siblings or explicitly contrasting single vs list retrieval, keeping it below a 5.

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?

It notes the optional single-status filter and the limit range but never states when to use this tool versus agenta_pay_get or agenta_pay_checkout, and gives no exclusions or preconditions. Usage is only implied by the verb 'List'.

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