markOrderAsPaid

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

The description fails to disclose mutation behavior, required permissions, side effects, or response format. The note about 'Balance' method is useful but minimal. With no annotations, the description should carry more behavioral context.

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 brief (two sentences) with no wasted words, but it is too sparse to be fully informative. It could add parameter details without losing conciseness.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what happens upon success, error conditions, or any additional context needed for correct invocation.

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 0%, meaning the description must explain parameters. The description does not mention any parameter meanings or expected values, leaving the agent to guess what orderId, paymentType, and paymentId represent.

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 (mark as paid) and the resource (P2P order), and includes a notable constraint. It distinguishes from sibling tools like createOrder, cancelOrder, etc.

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 implies usage for P2P orders but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide any prerequisites. No exclusion criteria beyond the 'Balance' method note.

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