request_payoutCreate a payout intent using an authenticated public payout profile. Provider confirmation is required before claiming payment was sent.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| currency | No | ||
| amount_cents | Yes | ||
| payout_profile_id | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark this as non-read-only and destructive, so the description doesn't need to restate mutation. It adds useful behavioral context: the call merely creates an intent, provider confirmation is required before payment can be considered sent, and there is an auth prerequisite for the profile. No contradiction with annotations.
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 with no filler; the primary action is front-loaded in the first clause and each sentence contributes either the operation or a key caveat.
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 basic action and a key workflow caveat, but with no output schema, no parameter descriptions, and financial stakes, it omits return value, error/failire conditions, and any follow-up mechanism. It is minimally viable for a straightforward call but leaves notable gaps.
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 0% and the description does not explain amount_cents, currency, or the meaning/format of payout_profile_id beyond repeating 'payout profile'. Field names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no parameter-level value, so it fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.
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?
Description states a specific verb ('Create'), a resource ('a payout intent'), and a prerequisite ('authenticated public payout profile'). It is not a tautology and reads differently from nearby tools, but it does not differentiate from request_cashout, so it misses the top score.
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?
No explicit when-to-use or alternative routing appears; the sentence about provider confirmation describes post-call behavior rather than selection criteria. Given the sibling request_cashout, an agent cannot tell which payout tool to pick.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct action: profile registration, work discovery, leasing, listing contributions, viewing stats, reviewing, and submitting. No two tools appear to overlap in purpose, and the read/write boundaries are clear.
Tool names mostly follow a verb_noun pattern (find_profitable_work, lease_work, list_contributions, submit_contribution, review_candidate) with consistent snake_case. Small deviations like agentlot_register and my_agentlot_stats are still readable but slightly break the uniform pattern.
Seven tools is well-scoped for an agent marketplace workflow. Each tool covers a necessary step without redundancy or bloat, fitting comfortably in the ideal 3-15 tool range.
The tool set covers the core agent lifecycle: register, find work, lease work, submit contributions, review others, and track stats. Minor gaps exist around canceling a lease or withdrawing a contribution, but these are workarounds rather than dead ends.