payment_methods

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that Fewsats handles payment method selection automatically, which adds useful context about system behavior. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or response format, leaving gaps for a tool that retrieves sensitive financial data.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by concise usage guidelines. Every sentence adds value without waste, making it efficient and well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description provides adequate purpose and usage guidance but falls short on behavioral details like authentication needs, data format, or error cases. For a tool handling payment methods, more context on security or response structure would improve completeness.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately focuses on usage context rather than parameters, earning a high score as it avoids redundancy and adds value beyond the schema.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('user's payment methods'), making it immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'payment_info' or 'billing_info', which might have overlapping functionality.

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 guidance on when to use this tool ('rarely need to call this unless instructed by the user, or to troubleshoot payment issues') and when not to use it ('Fewsats will automatically select the best payment method'), effectively distinguishing it from automated processes and clarifying its situational application.

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