List store payment providers

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds a meaningful behavioral guarantee: 'Never exposes gateway credentials, secrets, or configuration.' It also states the response is split into two categories, which helps set expectations about what the tool returns even without an output schema.

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, compact sentence that states the operation, the output structure, and a security-relevant behavior. It is front-loaded with the core action and avoids any filler or repetition of the title.

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 list tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description provides enough information: what it lists, how the result is organized, and what it will never expose. An agent can correctly decide to invoke it and understand the basic shape of the response.

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%, so the description does not need to explain the parameters. The optional include_currency_unsupported parameter is already well documented in the schema, and the description adds no additional parameter-level nuance. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('List') and a clear resource ('a store's payment providers'), and further clarifies the output is split into connected providers and installable gateways. This distinguishes it cleanly from sibling tools like ecommerce_createAPaymentProviderConnectLinkV1, which handles installation/connection rather than listing.

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 clearly implies this is the tool to use when you need to see a store's payment providers and available gateways. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent choosing among siblings.

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