list-payments

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses a critical behavioral trait: when created_after/created_before are set, results are fetched sorted by created and filtered client-side, overriding the orderBy parameter. This is essential for correct usage.

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?

Two well-structured sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second provides a critical implementation note. No wasted words.

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?

The description sufficiently explains the tool's behavior and parameter quirks. Although it omits return structure, the absence of an output schema and the simplicity of a list operation make this acceptable. The clarification about client-side filtering is particularly valuable for correct invocation.

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 covers all 6 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds significant value by explaining the interaction between created_after/created_before and sorting, which is not evident from schema alone.

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 lists payments across all accounts with pagination and sorting, and defines payments as money received. It distinguishes from account-specific tools by noting 'across all accounts'.

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 clear usage context, including the purpose and important limitations (Billforward's lack of native created-date filter). It does not explicitly compare to siblings like list-invoices or list-receipts, but the detail about filter behavior guides appropriate use.

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