get_merchant_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states this retrieves the 'authenticated merchant's' profile, implying authentication is required, but doesn't specify what happens if authentication fails, rate limits, or response format. For a read operation with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word earns its place: 'Retrieve' (action), 'authenticated merchant's user profile' (target), and 'including ID, nickname, and site' (scope). There's no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the return value looks like (structure, data types), error conditions, or authentication requirements. For a tool that presumably returns user profile data, more contextual information would be helpful despite the lack of output schema.

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 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already fully documents the lack of inputs. The description appropriately doesn't add parameter details beyond what's in the schema, maintaining a baseline score of 4 for zero-parameter tools.

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 specific action ('Retrieve'), target resource ('authenticated merchant's user profile'), and scope of data returned ('including ID, nickname, and site'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_payment (which retrieves payment data) and search_payments (which searches multiple payments).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (like authentication requirements), nor does it differentiate from sibling tools beyond what's implied by the purpose. No explicit when/when-not statements or alternative tool references are included.

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