list_payments_for_client

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action and filter, omitting details about pagination, ordering, required permissions, or whether payments are listed fully or partially. The 'top' parameter hints at pagination but is not explained.

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 with no wasted words, but it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity. It earns its place but could be more informative in the same length.

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 two parameters (one required, one with default) and an output schema, the description should explain the output, pagination behavior, and any prerequisites. It provides none of this, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameter meanings. The 'client_id' parameter is implied by the tool name, but the 'top' parameter (integer with default 0) is not mentioned at all, leaving its purpose unclear.

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 verb 'list', the resource 'payments', and the filtering condition 'for a specific client'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_payments (no filter) and list_payments_for_project (different filter).

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 implies when to use the tool (for payments of a specific client) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or what alternatives exist beyond what sibling names suggest.

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