Pay: connect

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-destructive mutation that is not open-world, so the safety profile is partly covered. The description adds that this creates an external Stripe Connect account and kicks off an onboarding flow, but omits whether it returns a redirect/onboarding URL, whether it is idempotent, or what auth is required.

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?

A single nine-word sentence with the core action front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though it is lean enough that a little more specificity could have been added without bloating it.

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?

With no output schema and minimal annotations, the agent is left guessing what the call returns (e.g., an onboarding URL) and what user action follows. For a side-effecting setup tool that begins a multi-step flow, the description stops at the minimum viable level.

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 tool takes zero parameters, and the description correctly implies that setup requires no caller-supplied input. Per the rubric, a 0-parameter tool takes the baseline of 4.

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?

States a specific verb+resource+action: setting up a Stripe Connect account and starting onboarding. An agent can tell this is the account-provisioning entry point, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with the pay_status / pay_payments / pay_methods siblings.

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?

'Start onboarding' implies this is the first step in a sequence, which gives implied usage guidance. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives (e.g., check pay_status first, or don't call if an account already exists) and no stated prerequisites.

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