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

The description discloses that payouts are not immediate: 'queued for operator processing' and 'settlement schedule.' This goes beyond the annotations, which only provide a title. It also implies a constraint (only earned treasury balance), giving meaningful behavioral context absent from 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 concise sentences deliver the core purpose and key behavioral traits without redundancy. Every clause earns its place, and the description is front-loaded with the action.

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 purpose, destination, and asynchronous processing. With an output schema present and a straightforward parameter set, this is nearly complete. It could mention response timing or failure modes, but those are likely covered by the output schema, so the description suffices for this complexity.

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%, with each parameter fully described (amount constraints, API key origin, Stripe account example). The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond the schema, which is adequate given the schema's clarity.

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: 'Request a payout of earned treasury balance to your connected Stripe account.' This clearly identifies the verb (request), resource (payout), and destination (Stripe). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools, none of which handle payouts directly.

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 implies when to use this tool (when you want to withdraw earned balance) and sets expectations: payouts are queued and run on a settlement schedule. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but no sibling tool offers this function, so the context is sufficient for selection.

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