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

While annotations confirm it is a read-only action, the description discloses critical behavioral context: 'Sending on a different network loses the funds.' This is a high-stakes behavioral warning that goes beyond standard metadata.

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 extremely concise. The first sentence defines the resource, and the second sentence provides the necessary operational context and use case, making it highly efficient.

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?

Given that inputs are empty and the safety profile is covered by annotations, the description is fully complete. It addresses the domain logic (which coins) and the critical failure mode (network mismatch) an agent needs to know before calling it.

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?

Since there are zero parameters, the baseline is high. The description adds valuable semantics by identifying the two specific data points that the tool provides: 'coins and networks accepted for payment'.

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?

It explicitly states the tool lists accepted coins and networks for payment. By referencing 'create_order' in the same description, it clearly defines its operational purpose relative to the existing 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 provides a clear operational usage guideline by linking the tool's output to the 'create_order' input. It also gives a crucial operational warning about network mismatch, which is vital for its intended use.

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