ze_list_payment_methodsLists available payment methods for a Zé Delivery order. Shows options without charging, with card last-four digits redacted for privacy.
listPaymentMethods (200 with internal error without a full session). Last-four redacted. Does not charge.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| privacy_mode | No | ||
| response_format | No | markdown |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.4Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds meaningful behavior beyond the read-only and idempotent annotations: it discloses last-four redaction, confirms no charge, and notes a session-dependent failure mode. This gives the agent useful expectations about side effects and privacy.
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 very short and contains no filler; each clause contributes either a safety guarantee, a privacy note, or a failure behavior. The parenthetical error note is compressed, but the overall structure is front-loaded and efficient.
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 no output schema, the return format and the effect of privacy_mode are left unexplained, and neither parameter is documented in the schema or description. For a two-parameter tool, the definition is under-specified despite annotation coverage for safety.
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%, and the description says nothing about privacy_mode or response_format. The parameter names and enums are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description does not compensate for the missing parameter documentation.
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 conveys that this tool lists payment methods and explicitly states it does not charge, which helps distinguish it from order/checkout siblings. However, the opening is partly redundant with the tool name, and the '200 with internal error without a full session' phrasing muddies the core purpose.
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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and no reference to a checkout or payment flow. The only contextual hint is that a full session is needed, but no exclusions or sibling comparisons are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.