List Recent Payment Decisions

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: it reveals the response includes payee, amount, reason, and blocking rule, specifies newest-first ordering, and notes it works offline. This complements the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations without contradiction.

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 compact yet information-dense: three short sentences covering purpose, return fields, ordering, filtering use case, and operational traits. No fluff or redundant details, and the main verb+resource appear immediately.

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?

The tool has only two parameters, no output schema, and strong annotations. The description covers the return format (payee, amount, reason, rule), ordering, filtering, and safety traits, making it fully self-contained for an agent to invoke 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?

Schema coverage is 100% (both parameters are described in the schema), so baseline is 3. The description reinforces the status filter's purpose by linking it to a concrete query ("what got blocked"), adding practical value beyond the schema alone.

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 lists recent agent payment decisions, specifies the ordering (newest first), the exact fields returned (payee, amount, reason, blocking rule), and distinguishes it from other tools by focusing on list/query behavior versus explanation or spending summaries.

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?

It provides a clear use case ("Filter by status to answer 'what got blocked' directly"), which implies when to use the filter. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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