brc_list_cash_payments

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, pagination behavior, or response format. The presence of pagination parameters implies listing behavior, but this is not explicitly stated.

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 short sentence, making it concise but lacking detail. It front-loads the core purpose but sacrifices completeness. Given the tool's complexity (7 parameters, no output schema), the brevity is insufficient.

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, high parameter count, and no annotations, the description should provide more context about the tool's behavior, result format, and parameter usage. The single sentence fails to meet these needs, leaving the agent with many unknowns.

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 has 43% parameter description coverage (filter, orderBy, companyName have descriptions), but the tool description adds no additional meaning to any parameter. Key pagination parameters (top, skip, page, pageSize) are left undocumented by both schema and description.

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 ('Lists') and the resource ('BRC cash payments'). It is specific and unambiguous, though it could differentiate further from sibling list tools by noting that it is specifically for cash payments (as opposed to cash receipts or other entities).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like brc_get_cash_payment, brc_batch_cash_payments, or other list tools. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use information is given.

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