search_bill_payments

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states 'search' implying read-only, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as rate limits, pagination behavior, or effects. The schema hints at pagination parameters, but the description ignores this.

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 a single sentence of 9 words, which is concise but lacks structure. It does not front-load critical information or break down complex aspects, making it minimally adequate.

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 tool has two parameters, a nested object, no output schema, and many siblings, the description is very incomplete. It does not explain the return format, pagination, or criteria structure, leaving significant gaps for an agent to use it correctly.

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 the 'company' parameter has a description in the schema. The description adds 'match given criteria' but does not explain the structure of the 'criteria' array or the meaning of 'asc', 'desc', 'limit', 'offset', 'count', 'fetchAll'. With 50% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate.

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 'Search' and resource 'bill payments' in QuickBooks Online, clearly indicating what the tool does. It distinguishes from siblings by entity name, but does not further differentiate itself from other search tools, which is acceptable but not exceptional.

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 versus alternatives like search_bills or other search tools. The description only implies usage for bill payments, but does not state exclusions or provide context for choosing this tool over siblings.

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