Request Payout

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the payout is reversible, what happens if the balance is insufficient, or if confirmation is required. For a financial transaction, critical safety information is missing.

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, clear, and concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the essential action and target.

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 that this is a financial transaction tool with a mutation effect, the description is too minimal. It omits prerequisites (e.g., saved bank account must exist), potential failure modes, and result expectations. No output schema or annotations exist to compensate.

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 input schema covers the single parameter fully (100% description coverage). The description does not add any semantic information beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., amount in kobo). At baseline, this is adequate but not enhanced.

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 ('request a payout'), the source ('from your wallet'), and the destination ('to your saved bank account'). It effectively distinguishes this tool from related siblings like 'neuron_fund_wallet' and 'neuron_save_bank_account'.

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 the user has a wallet and a saved bank account but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'neuron_get_bank_account' or 'neuron_wallet_balance'). No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are given.

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