list_payees

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds no behavioral context beyond this, such as pagination details or rate limits, but doesn't contradict annotations, so it meets the lower bar with annotations present.

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 with zero waste—'List all payees for a specific budget'—directly conveying the core functionality without unnecessary elaboration, making it highly efficient and well-structured.

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 low complexity (list operation), rich annotations (read-only, idempotent, etc.), and the presence of an output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It could benefit from more usage guidance, but the structured data compensates well for the simple purpose.

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%, but the description mentions 'for a specific budget', which implicitly relates to the 'budget_id' parameter. It doesn't explain the 'limit' parameter or provide additional semantics beyond what the schema's type constraints offer, resulting in a baseline score due to partial compensation.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'payees' with scope 'for a specific budget', making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_payee' (singular) or 'list_transactions' that might also involve payees, missing full sibling distinction.

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 like 'get_payee' for a single payee or 'list_transactions' that might include payee information. It mentions 'for a specific budget' but doesn't clarify prerequisites or exclusions, offering minimal usage context.

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