Payees — Get

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

The '[READ]' prefix simply restates the readOnlyHint=true annotation, adding no new behavioral context. Nothing is said about what happens for an unknown payee_id, whether the optional plan_id changes the result scope, or any authorization requirements. With annotations covering the safety profile, the description was free to spend its words on behavior and chose not to.

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?

A single short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource; no padding. The redundant '[READ]' tag is the only wasted token, but the description is otherwise tight.

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?

An output schema exists, so the return shape need not be described, but with 0% schema coverage the description should at minimum explain plan_id and error behavior for a missing payee. Two parameters, one of them unexplained, leaves the agent guessing before invocation.

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%, so the description carries the full burden, yet it only implies payee_id ('by ID') and never mentions plan_id at all. The meaning of a nullable plan_id — whether it scopes the payee to a plan or defaults globally — is undocumented in both places.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a single payee') and scopes it to one record versus a collection. It does not name payees_list as the alternative, so sibling differentiation is left to inference.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus payees_list or payee_locations_list_for_payee, and no prerequisites (e.g. does payee_id need to come from a prior list call?). The agent must infer all of this from the name.

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