get_payment_gateway

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds the common IDs as useful context but doesn't disclose other behavioral aspects such as response format, variable returns based on the 'fields' parameter, or error handling. No contradiction with 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 a single sentence with a list of common IDs, front-loaded with the main action and resource. It is concise with zero redundant prose, efficient for an agent to parse.

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?

For a simple getter with two parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It explains what the tool does and provides example ID values. Minor gap: it doesn't mention that the 'fields' parameter can customize the response, but the schema covers that. Overall adequate for tool selection and 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and both parameters have meaningful descriptions. The tool description repeats the examples already present in the schema (e.g., cod, bacs, stripe, razorpay) without adding new parameter semantics beyond what is already structured.

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 clearly states the action ('Get full details') and the resource ('payment gateway'), and specifies retrieval by ID. It also provides common IDs (bacs, cheque, cod, etc.) as examples, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_payment_gateways and update_payment_gateway.

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 usage for fetching a single gateway by ID but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like list_payment_gateways or mention exclusions. No clear context for choosing this tool vs. its siblings is provided.

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