payments_list_orders

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read. The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as pagination behavior, response format, or authentication requirements. With annotations covering safety, a score of 2 is appropriate because it still fails to disclose anything 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?

Two words is not conciseness; it is under-specification. There is no front-loading of important details, no emphasis on key parameters or usage constraints. The description is minimized to the point of being unhelpful.

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 13 parameters and no output schema, this tool is complex. The description offers nothing to help the agent understand the scope, semantics, or expected results. It is entirely inadequate for effective invocation.

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 schema provides 100% coverage of parameters, each with a description. The tool description does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema. Per the rubric, when schema coverage is high, a baseline of 3 is appropriate. The description does not compensate for any gaps because there are none.

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 Orders' states a verb and resource but is extremely generic. It does not distinguish this tool from other listing tools like payments_list_coupons or payments_list_transactions. It essentially repeats the tool name without any specifics.

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. There is no mention of the required altId parameter, the various filters, or any scenario that would make this the appropriate choice. No exclusions or context.

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