payments_list_order_notes

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no behavioral details such as pagination behavior, sorting, filtering, or what exactly constitutes an 'order note', so it provides no additional value beyond the 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 minimal but not intentionally concise; it omits essential explanatory content. While it is not verbose, the single phrase is underspecified rather than efficiently worded, flagging it as under-specification rather than good conciseness.

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 only a terse description, the tool lacks clarity on what is returned, how notes are ordered, or any limitations. For an agent to decide if this tool meets its needs, the description is insufficient—more context is expected for a listing operation.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters (altId, altType, orderId). The description does not add any parameter-related information, so it falls to the baseline of 3, as the schema already handles the semantics.

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 'List Order Notes' uses a specific verb with a clear resource, stating exactly what the tool does. It does not name any sibling tools for differentiation, but the core purpose is unambiguous without needing further context.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like payments_list_orders or payments_get_order_by_id. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or preferred scenarios, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name.

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