Get Fraud Assessment

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=true), description adds idempotent nature and null return when no assessment exists. Annotations already indicate read-only, so additional behavioral details are valuable but not extensive.

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?

Two sentence description with example and two exclusions is efficient and front-loaded. Every sentence provides essential context with no redundancy.

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 output schema exists, description doesn't need to explain return values. It covers usage, behavior, and parameters adequately. Could mention output existence but not necessary.

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 descriptions for both parameters. Description adds tenant authentication constraint for operator_did and default model behavior for score_version, adding value beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states it is for read-only fraud assessment of a single operator DID, with verb 'get' and specific resource. Distinguishes from siblings by explicitly naming alternatives (paybond_get_fraud_metrics, paybond_get_intent).

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('when you need the read-only fraud assessment...'), provides example usage, and explicitly states when not to use with specific alternative tools. Clear guidance for agent decision-making.

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