createPaymentUrls

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

Discloses URL expiration of 72 hours and reissuance requirement. Covers disallowed conditions. However, annotations include destructiveHint: true but description does not address destructive behavior beyond 'issuing URLs', leaving a slight ambiguity. Overall, good behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

Description is well-structured with front-loaded purpose, followed by expiration, disallowed cases, and alternative tools. Efficient without unnecessary words, though could be slightly shorter.

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?

For a single-parameter tool with no output schema and given annotations, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, usage, constraints, expiration, and alternatives. It is self-contained and addresses likely agent questions.

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?

Only parameter sale_id is described as identifying the target order, but no additional details on format or constraints beyond what schema provides (integer range). Schema description coverage is 0%, so description compensates minimally.

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 payment URLs for unpaid orders, using sale_id to identify the order. It distinguishes from sibling tools like getSale, getSales, and sendSalesMail by specifying their alternative purposes.

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 (unpaid orders), provides conditions under which issuance is not possible (paid, cancelled, unsupported payment methods), and mentions reissuance after expiration. Also names alternative tools for related tasks.

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