Create acquiring session

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return value, the need for a follow-up call, and that a session can hold multiple payments. While it omits authorization needs, idempotency, and failure behavior, the disclosed workflow context adds meaningful behavioral insight beyond the schema.

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?

Three sentences each earn their place: what it does, what it returns, and what to do next. There is no redundant phrasing and the key information is front-loaded.

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 covers the core workflow (create session, follow up with payment) and the multi-payment nature. However, with no output schema and 10 parameters, it misses important details such as the required client_phone format, behavior of success/fail URLs, and session expiration rules. It provides a good high-level overview but is not fully complete.

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?

Schema descriptions cover 60% (6/10) of parameters, and the description adds no parameter-specific meaning. The remaining parameters client_email, client_first_name, client_last_name, and client_patronymic lack schema descriptions and are unaddressed by the description, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 identifies the specific action 'Create a NovaPay Internet Acquiring payment session', distinguishes it from the sibling create_checkout_session by specifying 'Acquiring', and states the return value (session id) and the follow-up tool. This makes the purpose unambiguous and differentiates it from siblings.

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?

It explicitly instructs to follow up with add_acquiring_payment to get a payment URL, providing a clear when-to-use and next step. However, it does not contrast with create_checkout_session or state when not to use this tool, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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