Zahlungsmethoden auflisten

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Listet alle konfigurierten' implies a read-only operation and adds scope ('alle konfigurierten' = all configured), which is useful context. However, it does not clarify whether the list includes only enabled gateways or all gateways with settings, nor does it describe pagination or return format.

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, straightforward sentence that front-loads the action and scope. It is concise and entirely relevant, with no wasted words.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is adequately informative. It states the resource and scope, which is sufficient for a simple read operation. However, it does not describe the response structure or any filtering behavior, which could have been added for clarity.

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 has zero parameters, and the schema is empty. With no parameters to explain, the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics, but none are needed.

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: 'Listet alle konfigurierten Zahlungsmethoden auf' (Lists all configured payment methods). The verb 'Listet' and resource 'Zahlungsmethoden' specify a list operation for payment gateways, distinguishing it from sibling tools like woo_list_orders or woo_list_products.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description merely states what it does, with no mention of conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions. For a simple list tool, the context is implied but not explicitly communicated.

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