firestarter_payment_method

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

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description carries the burden of behavioral clarity. It discloses that the tool returns a 'no-login Stripe setup link (works from any channel) plus a dashboard link,' and clarifies its role in the purchase funnel. While it doesn't explicitly list side effects (e.g., whether it creates a Stripe session), it doesn't mislead and adds meaningful context 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 relatively long (~150 words) but every sentence earns its place: it front-loads the primary action, then explains context, triggers, and return values. While it could be tightened, the structure is logical and non-redundant.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete: it covers purpose, when to use, what it returns, and how it fits among many siblings. The agent has all necessary information to decide when to call it and what to expect.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameter usage, and it doesn't attempt to. No gaps exist in this dimension.

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 a clear, specific purpose: 'Check the buyer's payment method status and get a link to add or update their card.' It distinguishes this from sibling tools by explicitly positioning it as the last step of a purchase and naming related tools (firestarter_execute, shipping_option_index) in the context. No ambiguity remains about what this tool does.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this tool when the buyer asks about payment or an order is waiting on a card.' It also clarifies when NOT to use it (browsing, quoting, comparing never require a card) and contrasts it with other tools in the purchase flow. The guidance is unambiguous and prescriptive.

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