Find payee

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral detail by specifying case-insensitive substring matching. It omits result ordering or no-match behavior, but the output schema covers return structure.

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 core behavior is front-loaded in a single sentence, followed by illustrative examples. The three examples are somewhat repetitive but each demonstrates a different phrasing of the same underlying query, so they earn their place.

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 annotations, a complete input schema, and an output schema, the description provides enough context to call the tool correctly. The only minor gap is absence of guidance on result ordering or behavior when there are zero matches.

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 name_search and limit are fully documented in the input schema. The description's examples reinforce name_search usage but add no syntax or constraint information beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Find'), resource ('payees'), and matching scope ('names contain a search term, ignoring case'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list_payees (which has no filter) and write tools like create_payee or rename_payee.

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 example queries map natural-language intents to name_search values, which gives clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this versus list_payees or what happens when no match is found, so the guidance is strong but not exhaustive.

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