bokio_get_bank_payment

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), so the bar is lower. The description nonetheless adds real context beyond them: results are scoped to payments created by this integration, which prevents an agent from expecting a complete bank-payment view.

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?

Two short sentences, zero waste. The core operation is front-loaded and the scope caveat follows immediately.

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?

A simple single-record getter with full schema coverage and annotations carrying the safety profile, so the description needs little more. The scope limitation is the one thing only the description could supply, and it does. Return shape is not described, but no output schema exists, leaving a minor gap.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters (companyId default behavior, bankPaymentId sourcing and not-found error) are already fully documented. The description only echoes 'by id' and adds no syntax or sourcing detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is correct.

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 and resource ('Get one bank payment by id'), which implicitly contrasts with the sibling list tool bokio_list_bank_payments. It does not name the sibling explicitly, but the singular 'one ... by id' framing makes the distinction unambiguous.

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?

Adds a genuine usage constraint: the integration only ever returns payments it created, and creation is 'deliberately not exposed' — telling the agent not to hunt for a create tool. It stops short of explicitly routing to bokio_list_bank_payments for id discovery (that hint lives only in the schema).

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