firestarter_payout_eligibility

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

The description goes well beyond annotations by explaining the semantics of 'unknown' for Stripe, the authoritative nature of PayPal's list, and the real-world consequences of selling in an unsupported country (escrow, eventual pause). These are behavioral nuances that readOnly/idempotent hints do not convey.

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 long but front-loaded with the core purpose and contains important caveats that earn their place. A small amount of redundancy ('which is exactly why checking first is worth it') keeps it from being perfectly concise, but the structure is logical.

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, the description still conveys what the result will contain (per-rail verdicts) and how to interpret the two key outcomes. It also covers downstream consequences and points to the right sibling tool for thresholds, making it self-sufficient for an agent.

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 single parameter 'country' already has a complete schema description with format and examples, so the description adds little beyond restating that it takes a country code. Baseline 3 is appropriate because schema coverage is 100%.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Check whether Firestarter can pay a seller in a given country', takes an ISO country code, and returns a per-rail verdict. It also distinguishes itself by noting no seller account is required and by contrasting with related operations such as firestarter_payouts.

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?

Usage is explicitly tied to concrete triggers: 'whenever someone asks can I sell on Firestarter from <country>' or before walking a seller through registration. It also names an alternative, firestarter_payouts, for current thresholds, and explains why checking first is valuable.

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