list_paywalls

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 states the tool lists paywalls and describes return fields (IDs, names, pricing, etc.), which adds context beyond basic functionality. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or error handling, leaving gaps in behavioral understanding for a tool with no annotation support.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('List all your x402 paywalls') and immediately specifies return details. There is no wasted text, and every part of the sentence contributes directly to understanding the tool's function and output.

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 moderate complexity (listing with pagination), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is partially complete. It covers the purpose and return fields but lacks details on pagination behavior, error cases, or authentication needs, which are important for a tool with no structured support in annotations or output schema.

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%, with both parameters ('page' and 'per_page') fully documented in the schema. The description does not add any parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides, such as default behaviors or constraints, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without compensating with extra details.

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 ('your x402 paywalls'), specifying what the tool does. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_paywall' (singular retrieval) and 'create_paywall' (creation) by indicating it returns multiple paywalls with comprehensive details, making the purpose specific and well-differentiated.

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. It does not mention prerequisites, compare with similar tools like 'get_paywall' for single paywall retrieval, or specify contexts where listing is preferred over other operations, leaving the agent without usage direction.

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