vaultix_list_payouts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List all payouts' implies a read-only operation, but it doesn't specify authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior, or return format. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves critical behavioral traits undocumented.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action ('List all payouts'), making it immediately clear. Every word earns its place, achieving optimal conciseness.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what a 'payout' entails in this context, how results are returned (e.g., list format, pagination), or any prerequisites. For a tool with no structured behavioral data, the description should provide more context to be fully helpful.

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 100%, with clear documentation for both parameters (limit and status with enum values). The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline score of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting.

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') and resource ('payouts'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'vaultix_get_payout' (singular retrieval) by indicating it returns multiple payouts. However, it doesn't specify scope (e.g., 'all' implies no filtering, but parameters allow filtering), which slightly reduces specificity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'vaultix_get_payout' for retrieving a single payout or 'vaultix_list_transactions' for broader listings, leaving the agent to infer usage from context alone.

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