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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly=false, idempotent=false, openWorld=true), the description discloses substantial behavior: a one-time link, privacy ("You never see or type bank details"), a $25 payout threshold, the first-time-only constraint, and a side effect ("The partner gets a text whenever this link is made"). These are exactly the traits an agent needs and none are in the structured fields.

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 return value is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by tightly scoped sentences covering privacy, the payout threshold, the first-time-only limit, and the SMS side effect. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what is returned (the one-time link), what the flow entails, and the constraints. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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% and the single partner_key parameter is fully documented in the schema itself, including the REST Authorization header variant. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource: it 'Returns a one-time link' that routes the partner to Stripe to confirm identity and add a bank. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like partner_create_sublink, partner_get_links, and partner_claim_key because it names the Stripe bank-onboarding flow and the first-time-only scope.

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 gives a clear usage condition: 'First-time setup only: once payouts work, payout changes are made by the partner on their signed-in dashboard.' This tells the agent when the tool is appropriate and points to the alternative path (the partner dashboard), though it does not name a sibling tool explicitly.

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