create_checkout

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

The description reveals that a human is required to use the generated checkout URL, indicating a non-automated step. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits like side effects, rate limits, or authentication requirements. With no annotations, this partial transparency is adequate but could be improved.

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 concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the core action and 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?

Without an output schema, the description does not explicitly state the return value (the checkout URL) or any success/failure indicators. For a payment-related tool, more context would be helpful, but the description is minimally adequate.

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 coverage is 100%, so the input schema already describes both parameters ('wallet' and 'amount_usd_micros') with their types and formats. The description adds no additional meaning, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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 creates a Stripe checkout URL for funding an agent allowance via credit card. It uses a specific verb and resource, and the purpose is distinct from siblings like 'allowance_create' or 'tier_checkout'.

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 implies usage for funding agent allowance via credit card, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other payment or allowance tools). No when-not-to-use or exclusions are mentioned.

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