list_payments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the API method (GET) implying a read-only operation, and describes the return structure. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or potential side effects. The description is adequate but not rich.

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 well-structured with sections for purpose, API call, and return structure. It is fairly concise but includes some redundancy (the opening line is repeated in the usage section). Overall, it is organized and front-loaded.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description provides a complete picture: it explains the return structure (dict with total and payments array, including fields like id, name, payment_type, enabled, etc.). This is sufficient for an agent to understand what the tool returns. No gaps identified.

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?

There are zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (trivially). The description does not need to explain parameters. According to guidelines, baseline for 0 parameters is 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?

The description clearly states it retrieves the list of enabled payment methods for the store. It specifies the exact resource (payment methods) and the purpose (check available channels, analyze order payments), distinguishing it from other list tools like list_addon_products or list_channels.

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 includes a '【用途】' section that explains when to use the tool: to view currently set payment methods, check available channels, or for order payment analysis. It does not explicitly exclude other tools, but the context is clear. No mention of when not to use or alternatives, but sufficient for most scenarios.

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