quickbooks_list_payments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. However, it only states the function without disclosing return format, pagination behavior, authentication requirements, or any side effects. The existence of an output schema is not utilized to add context.

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 concise with two sentences and an argument list. It is front-loaded with the purpose. However, the argument list repeats information already in the schema with minimal added value, and the structure could be improved by integrating parameter info into the prose.

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 presence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values. However, with no annotations and three optional parameters, the description omits important context such as filtering logic, default date ranges, and result ordering. It is adequate for basic use but leaves gaps for effective agent decision-making.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description provides the only parameter documentation. It adds basic format hints for dates ('YYYY-MM-DD') and a brief description for max_results. While helpful, it does not explain constraints, defaults beyond the schema, or relationships between parameters.

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 QuickBooks payments and specifies the purpose ('cash movement and reconciliation analysis'). It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('QuickBooks payments'), distinguishing it from other list tools within the QuickBooks domain, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of context, exclusions, or when it is appropriate to use over other list tools (e.g., quickbooks_list_invoices). The agent must infer usage solely from the tool name.

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