square_list_payouts

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

The description mentions routing under JWT/tenant/company scope, which adds some authentication context, but fails to disclose read-only nature, permissions, pagination, or any side effects. Without annotations, this is insufficient.

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 short (3 lines) and front-loaded with the operation name, but it is under-specified. It sacrifices essential information for brevity, resulting in mediocre conciseness.

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?

Despite having an output schema (not shown), the description does not clarify what the tool retrieves (e.g., payout details, date ranges, filters) or how to use the arguments parameter effectively. It is incomplete for a list operation.

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% coverage, and the description only says 'arguments: JSON string of arguments for the connector operation.' This does not specify valid argument keys, types, or constraints, leaving the agent with no semantic guidance beyond the parameter name.

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 states 'Square connector operation `list_payouts`' which essentially restates the tool name without explaining what listing payouts means in a clear, natural language. It lacks a specific verb and resource description, making it barely distinguishable from a tautology.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like stripe_list_payouts or paypal_list_payouts. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusion criteria.

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