uber_eats_list_payment_methods

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It adds useful behavioral context: it's a read-only list operation requiring cart state, and it's explicitly tied to the checkout flow. The only minor gap is not stating the output format explicitly, but an output schema exists, partially mitigating this.

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?

Three concise sentences with zero waste. Every sentence provides value: what it does, a precondition, and when to use it. Efficient and front-loaded.

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 is simple (0 params) and has an output schema, so the description doesn't need to explain return values. The description conveys purpose, precondition, and usage timing. Given the tool's simplicity and the sibling context, this is reasonably complete, though it could note that it's distinct from set_checkout_payment (which actually selects a method vs. listing them).

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 tool has 0 parameters, making parameter semantics largely moot. The baseline for 0-param tools is 4. The description does add useful context about why there are no parameters (the methods are determined by the current cart state), which helps the agent understand the tool's statelessness.

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 what the tool does: 'List eligible payment methods for the current cart (checkout API).' The verb+resource is specific and unambiguous. It also clarifies scope ('for the current cart'), distinguishing it from potential sibling tools that handle other checkout aspects like set_checkout_payment or set_checkout_tip.

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 gives a clear precondition ('Requires items in the cart') and suggests when to use it ('Use after add_to_cart or when checkout fails'). It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools for cases where payment methods are NOT needed, but the context is clear enough for an agent to determine when this tool is appropriate.

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