create_payment_id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions 'permanent' but does not explain side effects, idempotency, rate limits, or required authentication (though headers are in the schema). The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the core generation action.

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, front-loaded sentence that communicates the essential purpose without any filler. Every word is functional, making it highly concise for the information it conveys.

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?

Given 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It fails to explain the return format, how the ID is used in payments, or any dependencies (e.g., needing a valid account). The USSD context helps but leaves significant gaps for a complex tool.

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% with each parameter described in the input schema. The description does not add further parameter-specific meaning, such as how 'name' or 'externalref' influence the generated ID. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles the load.

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 generates a permanent payment ID and provides the USSD dial format. It is specific about the verb 'generate' and the resource 'payment ID', but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'generate_payment_link' or 'initiate_payment', which manage payments differently.

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 hints at usage via USSD code, giving context on when to use the generated ID, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer appropriate use.

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