Create a Tegro.money payment link

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the tool builds a URL and that payment occurs later, but lacks details on return format, error handling, rate limits, or authentication specifics beyond the secret key. It does not contradict any annotations (none exist).

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?

Two concise sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the function, the second provides a prerequisite and clarifies behavior. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool has 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not explain the return value (the URL), format requirements for amount, or error scenarios. The agent is left with significant gaps in understanding how to use the tool effectively.

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 56%, but the description adds no parameter-level insight beyond what's already in the schema. It mentions 'amount and currency' but doesn't explain optional parameters like lang, failUrl, or paymenSystem. The description fails 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 'Build a ready-to-open payment URL (SCI form) for a given amount and currency,' which specifies the verb (build), resource (payment URL), and scope (amount, currency). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like tegro_create_order or tegro_get_balance.

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 mentions the prerequisite 'Needs TEGRO_SECRET_KEY' and clarifies that 'No money moves until the customer pays,' providing some usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like tegro_create_order, nor does it offer exclusions or when-not-to-use advice.

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