paygentic_set_policy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It indicates a mutation ('Add') but doesn't disclose whether it replaces existing policies, if there are limits on number of policies, or side effects. The API key requirement is useful but basic.

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 very concise: two short sentences that convey the core action and a prerequisite. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff.

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 5 parameters with 3 required and no output schema, the description provides a reasonable overview but misses details like how policies interact, whether they are cumulative, or what the response indicates. It is minimally adequate for an experienced 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?

With 60% schema description coverage, the description adds value by enumerating the policy types (per-transaction, daily, etc.), clarifying the purpose of the policyType enum. However, it does not explain the walletId parameter or the conditional requirement for category when policyType is 'category'.

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 uses a specific verb 'Add' and resource 'spending policy to a wallet', and lists the types of limits (per-transaction, daily, weekly, monthly, or category). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like paygentic_list_policies or paygentic_check_balance.

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 'Requires API key' as a prerequisite but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to set a new policy vs. list existing ones). No exclusion criteria or context about overlapping policies.

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