Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• jazzcash_charge_mobile_walletC
  2.7/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations exist, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It mentions MPIN authorization but omits side effects, idempotency, error behaviors, or asynchronous nature. Minimal disclosure for a financial transaction tool.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two short, direct sentences with no redundant information. However, conciseness sacrifices completeness, as key details are omitted.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given 11 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It covers only the amount unit and authorization mechanism, ignoring the purpose of other required fields, response structure, and potential error cases.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain parameters. Only 'amount_paisa' is clarified (PKR paisa). The other 10 parameters (including required fields like cnic and bill_reference) are left unexplained beyond schema patterns.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description clearly states it's a server-to-server charge against a JazzCash mobile wallet, with authorization via MPIN. It differentiates from siblings (e.g., create hosted checkout, refund) by name and core action, though no explicit differentiation is provided.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No prerequisites, exclusions, or context are provided, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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

• jazzcash_refund_transactionB
  3/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It identifies a write operation (refund) and a permission requirement, but does not disclose failure modes, idempotency, rate limits, or return behavior.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and free of fluff. However, it could be slightly more structured by listing the parameters or conditions.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Without an output schema or annotations, the description must cover prerequisites, behavior, and results. It mentions permissions but omits error handling, success response, and fails to describe the three required parameters.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  With 0% schema description coverage and no parameter descriptions in the text, the agent receives no explanation for txn_ref_no, amount_paisa, or description. The description's mention of 'full or partial refund' loosely connects to amount but does not clarify units or identifiers.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool issues a refund, specifies it can be full or partial, and targets previously settled JazzCash transactions. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like charge, checkout, or inquiry.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  It provides context (settled transaction) and a prerequisite (refund permissions enabled), but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. The agent can infer usage, but no exclusions are stated.

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

• jazzcash_inquire_transactionB
  3.1/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations provided. The description lacks details on side effects, error behavior (e.g., if transaction not found), latency, or whether it is read-only. Minimal transparency beyond the core action.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single sentence, front-loaded with the action and key parameter. No superfluous words. However, it could be slightly expanded to include return value information.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple lookup with one parameter, the description covers the basic purpose. However, it lacks description of the return value (expected status) and error handling, especially given no output schema.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 0%. The description mentions 'pp_TxnRefNo' but does not explain its format, constraints, or relationship to the JazzCash system. The parameter's purpose is only inferred from the tool's name.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the action ('look up'), the resource ('status of a JazzCash transaction'), and the key identifier ('by its pp_TxnRefNo'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like jazzcash_refund_transaction or jazzcash_charge_mobile_wallet.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no conditions mentioned. The description only states the basic lookup action without context.

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

• jazzcash_create_hosted_checkoutA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns a form and that amount is in paisa, but it does not describe side effects, idempotency, or authentication requirements. Some behavioral context is given but insufficient for a 4.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and contains no redundant phrases. Every sentence contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and key detail (paisa conversion).

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given 10 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not describe the return structure beyond mentioning action URL and hidden fields, nor does it cover potential errors, required configuration, or consequences of invoking the tool. The tool's complexity demands more context.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is only 20%, with only two parameters having descriptions. The description adds that amount is in PKR paisa (already in schema) and that txn_ref_no defaults to T+timestamp (beyond schema), but does not explain the ppmpf_1-5 fields or return_url. The description adds minimal value.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool builds a signed Hosted Checkout form that redirects the customer to JazzCash to pay, and returns action URL and HTML snippet. This verb+resource combination uniquely identifies the tool among siblings like charge mobile wallet or inquire transaction.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage for checkout scenarios but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention when not to use it. No comparison to sibling tools or prerequisites are provided.

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

• jazzcash_environment_infoA
  4.7/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  The description explicitly states it does not return secrets, addressing a key safety concern. Although no annotations exist, the read-only nature is implicit; additional detail on idempotency would push to 5.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two concise, front-loaded sentences covering all essential aspects without redundancy.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool returns and its behavior. No gaps or missing information.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  With zero parameters, the baseline is 4 per rules. The description adds no parameter details, which is acceptable since schema coverage is 100%.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description specifies a clear verb ('Returns') and resource ('active environment, endpoint URLs, credentials status'). It distinctly sets the tool apart from siblings which involve transactions, payments, and refunds.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The tool's purpose as a status checker is unambiguous; no alternative tools provide environment info. Context signals confirm zero parameters, so usage is straightforward.

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