search_payments

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the tool searches payments, but fails to describe traits such as read-only status, potential rate limits, required permissions, or interaction side effects. The description is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 sentence that front-loads the core purpose. While concise, it is too minimal given the complexity of the tool, omitting necessary details. It earns a pass for lack of fluff but is under-specified.

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 has 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain pagination, result format, filtering behavior, or any constraints, leaving the agent with insufficient information to use the tool correctly.

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 description does not explain any of the 8 parameters (q, limit, offset, status, date_to, supplier, date_from, business_unit), and schema description coverage is 0%. The description adds no value beyond the parameter names in the schema, making parameter usage ambiguous.

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 tool searches 'Accounts Payable payments in Oracle Fusion,' providing a specific verb and resource that distinguishes it from sibling search tools like search_invoices or search_suppliers. However, it does not elaborate on the scope (e.g., all AP payments or a subset), preventing a higher score.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_payment_details or search_invoices. There are no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or prerequisite conditions, leaving the agent without context for proper selection.

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