list_payment_terms

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states what is listed, but does not explicitly state that it is a read-only operation, nor does it mention any sorting, pagination, or potential side effects. For a list tool, this is a notable gap.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential information without any waste. It also includes useful examples of what payment terms look like.

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?

For a simple parameterless list operation with no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool returns. Examples clarify the contents, making it complete for its complexity level.

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 zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain any. The baseline of 4 applies here, as there is no parameter detail to add.

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 uses a specific verb 'Lister' (list) with a clear resource 'conditions de paiement configurées' (configured payment terms). Examples of terms are provided, making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like list_payments or list_payment_methods.

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 when to use it: when you need to see the configured payment term options. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when not to use it, despite there being similar list tools (list_payment_methods, list_payments) that could confuse an agent.

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