List Payins

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral detail: default page size 50, hard cap of 1000, offset-based pagination, newest-first ordering, and that the response includes a total count.

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?

One front-loaded sentence states purpose, scope, and ordering, followed by a compact Args block and a one-line return note. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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 three-optional-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description supplies filters, pagination mechanics, ordering, and the shape of the return (list plus total count). The only gap is whether the paginated response carries a cursor/next-page indicator beyond total count.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond the schema by enumerating representative status values ('processing', 'completed', 'pending', 'failed') in a schema that defines no enum, and by restating the default/max in the argument list.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('List deposit transactions for the tenant') and adds a meaningful ordering guarantee ('newest first'). The resource (payins) is clearly distinct from the neighboring payout/transfer listing tools, so an agent can select it without opening the schema.

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 implied: this is the paginated listing of payins, and the status filter hints at narrowing by lifecycle state. However, it never states when to prefer ashar_get_payin (single record lookup) or how it relates to ashar_list_payouts, so the agent must infer the boundary.

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