get_contract_payment

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys that this is a read operation ('Get details'), but it does not disclose error behavior, permission requirements, or what specific details are returned. This is minimal but not misleading.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It efficiently states the action and target resource.

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 getter with two fully described parameters, the description is adequate, but it omits any details about the response shape or potential errors, especially since there is no output schema or annotations. The term 'details' is vague, so a bit more specificity about what information is returned would improve completeness.

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 already describes both parameters ('Payment ID' and 'Contract ID') with 100% coverage, so the description adds little semantic value. The phrase 'specific contract payment' aligns with the required contract_id and id but does not explain formats, relationships, or constraints beyond the schema.

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 tool's function: 'Get details of a specific contract payment'. It uses a specific verb ('Get'), identifies the resource ('contract payment'), and 'specific' indicates a singular lookup, distinguishing it from list, create, or delete 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_contract_payments or get_contract. There are no stated prerequisites, exclusions, or references to related tools, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name.

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