create_contract_payment

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 only says 'Create a new payment' without disclosing any side effects, such as whether the payment updates contract balances, whether the contract must exist, or what the response contains. This is minimal and lacks contextual behavior beyond the obvious write operation.

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, clear, and concise sentence. It contains no unnecessary words or filler and immediately conveys the tool's purpose.

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?

For a simple CRUD create operation with fully documented parameters, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks any mention of return behavior, side effects, or prerequisites, and there are no annotations or output schema to fill these gaps. It is sufficient for a basic tool but not richly contextual.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage of parameter descriptions (contract_id, amount, note), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra semantic information beyond what the schema already offers, but it does not need to compensate for any gaps.

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 action (create) and the resource (payment for a contract). It unambiguously distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_contract_payments, get_contract_payment, and delete_contract_payment, which represent different operations on the same resource.

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 explicit when-to-use or alternatives are mentioned. The intended use is implied by the tool name and description: use when adding a new payment to a contract. However, there is no guidance about prerequisites, such as the contract existing or when this should be used over other payment-related tools.

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