btcpay-mcp

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Enumerates status values (New, Processing, Settled, Expired, Invalid) which is valuable behavioral context. Describes return payload categories (amounts, payments, timing). Does not explicitly state read-only/safe nature, though implied by 'Get'.

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?

Structured with clear 'Args' and 'Returns' sections. Every line provides distinct value: purpose, parameter semantics, return structure, and enumerated states. No redundant or filler text.

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?

Appropriate for a single-parameter retrieval tool. Despite presence of output schema, the description adds value by enumerating possible status values. References sibling tool to establish context. No gaps given tool complexity.

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 has 0% description coverage (only title 'Invoice Id'). Description compensates excellently by specifying format (UUID string) and provenance (returned by create_invoice), giving the agent crucial semantic context for parameter population.

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?

Specific verb 'Get' with clear resource 'BTCPay invoice' and scope 'details and status'. Implicitly distinguishes from sibling 'create_invoice' (which creates) and 'list_invoices' (which lists without requiring ID).

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?

Provides prerequisite context by noting the invoice_id is 'returned by create_invoice', establishing the workflow sequence. However, lacks explicit contrast with 'list_invoices' for bulk retrieval scenarios.

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