List payouts of a connected account

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds useful context by stating that payouts travel from a connected account to its bank and by naming the returned fields, but it does not disclose pagination, ordering, read-only behavior, or failure conditions. This is a moderate contribution for a simple list tool.

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?

A single sentence with no fluff that front-loads the resource and scope before listing notable output fields. It is appropriately sized for a straightforward list tool.

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 is not complete for an agent selecting among many sibling tools: it lacks alternative routing, parameter semantics for limit, pagination expectations, and return-shape details beyond three fields. Given no output schema or annotations, more context is needed.

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%, so the description must compensate for the two parameters. It associates account_id with the connected account concept, but it never explains the limit parameter, its default, or the effect of the account_id pattern beyond what the schema already provides.

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 title clearly says 'List payouts' and the description identifies the resource (payouts), scope (from a connected account to its bank), and useful fields (status, arrival date, failure reason). It is distinguishable from siblings like stripe_list_transfers, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with them.

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?

There is no guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as stripe_list_transfers or stripe_balance, nor any exclusion clauses. The connected-account phrasing implies its context, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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