list_ap_payments

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. The only clue is 'Fails loudly', suggesting error messages are clear, but it omits details like pagination behavior, data freshness, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent.

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 very short (two phrases), which is concise, but it lacks important information. The '[Not in LCS /v1]' note adds clutter without aiding invocation. The structure is minimal but not effective for a guidance tool.

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 no parameter descriptions, no annotations, and only an existing output schema (unseen), the description is highly incomplete. It does not define 'AP payments', explain the 'fails loudly' behavior, or provide usage examples, making it insufficient for confident agent use.

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%, and the description does not mention or explain the two parameters (page, page_size). The agent receives no help understanding defaults, constraints, or valid values, failing to compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 'List AP payments', specifying the verb and resource. The name distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_payments' and 'get_ap_payment_status', but no explicit differentiation is provided in the description.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, which is a significant gap given the many sibling list tools.

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