Zahlung holen

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

The annotations already cover the safety profile (read-only, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive). The description adds meaningful behavioral context by contrasting the richer single-record output with the search list and by stating that it returns exactly one payment per call with no searching or pagination.

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 front-loaded and four sentences long, with each sentence serving a distinct purpose: what the tool does, when to use it, how its output differs from search, and its one-record scope. No sentence is wasted.

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 annotations, 100% schema coverage, and an existing output schema, the description is complete enough for correct invocation. It adds the key selection context an agent needs: use this after obtaining an id_by_customer, and expect richer fields than the search list.

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 parameters are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds only a small amount of context about the customer-scoped ID and does not mention response_format, so the baseline of 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: it fetches exactly one payment from BuchhaltungsButler by its client-scoped number. It explicitly distinguishes this single-record retrieval from bb_transactions_search, noting that the list yields only six fields while this call yields thirteen.

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?

It gives an explicit trigger: use this as soon as the id_by_customer is available, for example from a bb_transactions_search result. It also states a clear boundary—this tool does not search or paginate—which tells the agent when not to use it.

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