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

Annotations describe the operation as readOnly=false/openWorld=true/idempotent=false, and the description harmonizes with that by disclosing the two-phase payment flow and the critical rule that work starts only after payment is verified AND settled. It also explains what each method returns and the header/meta requirement for settlement — substantial behavioral context beyond 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 tight sentences front-load the core action and then pack the payment flow details efficiently. There is no filler, and every clause adds operational value.

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 having no output schema, the description states what each method returns and gives the settlement steps an agent must take. Combined with the schema's id and method definitions, an agent has enough information to drive the payment flow correctly.

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 covers 100% of parameters, giving the baseline 3. The description adds meaningful method semantics: stripe returns a Stripe Checkout URL and x402 returns v2 payment requirements on Base, plus which method is default. 'id' is not elaborated beyond the schema's 'Quoted job id,' but the schema already covers it.

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 opens with 'Pay a quoted job,' a specific verb+object that clearly identifies the operation. It then distinguishes between stripe and x402 payment paths, and the name/title align with the action.

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 clear usage context: pay only a 'quoted job,' and use stripe vs x402 based on desired payment method. It explains the two-step settlement for x402, but no sibling tool is a payment tool, so there are no explicit when-not-to-use alternatives.

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