Get payout

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

The description repeats the readOnlyHint annotation with 'Read-only' but does not add meaningful behavioral detail beyond that. It does not mention error behavior, response shape, or any side-effect-related caveats, though the annotations already cover the safety profile.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the read-only nature and immediately states the action and target resource.

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 read-only lookup with one parameter, the description is nearly complete. It identifies the resource, the identifier, and the safe read-only nature, which is sufficient for an agent to invoke it 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 input schema only provides 'zenId' as a string with minLength 1, so the description's 'by its ZEN ID' adds useful semantic meaning by tying the parameter to the ZEN payout identifier. It does not, however, explain the ID format or origin.

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 ('retrieve'), identifies the resource ('a ZEN payout'), and specifies the lookup key ('by its ZEN ID'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_transaction or create_payout.

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 phrase 'by its ZEN ID' implies the tool should be used when the agent already has a ZEN payout ID and needs the corresponding payout details. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over get_transaction or mention any exclusions.

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