getPayeeById

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states that it returns a single payee, with no mention of whether it is read-only, what happens if the payee is not found, or any error conditions. For a getter, this is minimal disclosure.

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, focused sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, achieving maximum conciseness while still conveying the primary 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 get-by-ID tool, the description combined with the full schema and output schema is largely complete. An agent can infer how to call it: provide plan_id and payee_id, and expect a single payee object. It lacks usage context, but that is covered under usage guidelines. Given the simplicity, it is adequate.

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%, so both parameters are fully documented in the input schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Returns a single payee.' The word 'single' differentiates from the sibling getPayees, which returns multiple. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with other get-by-ID tools like getPayeeLocationById, relying on the tool name for disambiguation. Purpose is clear but sibling differentiation could be stronger.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or pointing to getPayees for listing. Usage context is entirely implied by the name and schema.

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