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

The description goes well beyond the sparse annotations by disclosing payment timing ('ingenting belastes før kunden betaler på Stripe-siden'), link expiry (24 timer), dynamic pricing from the store, shipping calculation from postcode, VAT handling by Stripe, and purchase terms. This gives the agent important behavioral context without contradicting 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?

The description is compact yet dense with useful information. Each sentence adds value: the main purpose, customer flow, expiry, pricing sources, delivery rules, and terms link. The most important action is front-loaded, and nothing feels redundant.

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 creation flow, pricing behavior, delivery constraints, and terms, which is enough for correct invocation. The main missing piece is an explicit statement of the return value (e.g., that the response contains the Stripe link URL), especially since there is no output schema.

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 coverage is only 33%, and the description compensates by explaining delivery_method variants and the shipping_postcode requirement. It also clarifies that items are store products and that shipping depends on the postcode. It does not deeply describe the items array structure, but the schema already exposes sku and quantity with clear names and constraints.

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 action and resource: 'Oppretter en Stripe Checkout-lenke for valgte produkter og leveringsmåte.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from read-only siblings like get_product, get_shipping_rates, and list_products, since it is the only one creating a checkout link.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: whenever a checkout link for selected products and a delivery method is needed. It also clarifies delivery-method requirements such as pickup having no shipping and hentested/hjemlevering requiring shipping_postcode. It does not explicitly compare against sibling tools, but the purpose is unmistakable.

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