conditional_payment

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

No annotations present. Description does not disclose behavior when condition fails (e.g., transaction not sent, or reverted), how price data is sourced, or any limitations (e.g., only works on certain networks or with certain tokens). The example implies synchronous check but no details.

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?

Single sentence with a clear example, no extraneous information. Front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain return value/status, error handling, prerequisites (e.g., wallet balance, approval), or what happens if the price condition is not met.

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?

All 7 parameters are documented in the schema (100% coverage). Description adds a concrete example that explains how condition_token, condition_operator, and condition_value work together with amount and token, providing semantic clarity 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?

Description clearly states the action ('Send a payment only if a token price condition is met') and provides an explicit example ('send 5 USDC if WETH price > 2000'). This distinguishes it from unconditional payment tools like send_token and from sibling multi_condition_payment.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as send_token, multi_condition_payment, or batch_send. It does not mention that conditions are real-time or that the transaction fails silently if condition is not met.

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