x402_check_facilitator

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It discloses querying the /supported endpoint and reporting settlement capability, but does not state that it is read-only, mention authorization needs, error behavior, or rate limits.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource. No redundant information.

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?

Given the low parameter count, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose. However, it lacks details on the request method (likely GET) and response format, which would be helpful 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?

Only one parameter, with schema coverage at 0%. The description adds context about the default value's limitation regarding Robinhood Chain, but does not explain the parameter's purpose beyond its name. Partial compensation is acceptable.

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 (query/report), resource (x402 facilitator's /supported endpoint), and outcome (whether it can settle for this chain). It distinguishes from sibling tools by being specific to x402 facilitator checking.

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 mentions a default and a limitation (doesn't support Robinhood Chain), implying when to use the default. However, it does not explicitly provide when-not-to-use guidance or mention alternative tools from the sibling list.

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