search_payment_types

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

Annotations are sparse (readOnlyHint false, destructiveHint false, idempotentHint false, openWorldHint true) and do not clarify the behavior. The description adds no details about return values, pagination, or the effect of the 'body' parameter. It carries the burden but fails to disclose behavioral traits.

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 extremely short, but it essentially restates the tool name (search_payment_types) without adding meaningful detail. It is under-specification rather than effective conciseness, nearly a tautology.

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?

With no output schema and minimal annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how to use the required 'body' parameter, what the search returns, or how it differs from a simple list operation. The tool needs more contextual information to be usable.

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%, so the schema documents all parameters including 'body' as 'Request body as defined by the bexio API.' The description itself adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the verb 'Search' and the resource 'payment types', which clearly indicates the tool searches payment types. However, it does not distinguish from the sibling tool 'list_payment_types', so it lacks differentiation between searching and listing.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives like list_payment_types or other search tools. It lacks context on search criteria, required body structure, or typical use cases.

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