getPayments

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by stating that no query parameters are needed and what specific data is returned. No contradictions or omissions regarding behavioral traits.

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 two sentences long, front-loads the purpose, and wastes no words. Every sentence is meaningful and contributes to understanding.

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 the low complexity, no output schema, and minimal parameters, the description fully covers what the tool returns and when to use it. The usage scenarios and return fields are sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool 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?

The input schema has a single dummy parameter with description 'Not used', and schema coverage is 100%. The description proactively states 'クエリ不要' (no query required), clarifying that no parameters are needed, which adds meaning beyond the 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?

The description clearly states it retrieves a list of enabled payment settings for the shop, specifying the returned fields (ID, name, fee rules, conditions). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like getSale or getShop, which handle different resources.

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 explicitly mentions two use cases: referencing before presenting payment methods in the cart and matching with payment_id in order data. While it does not state when not to use the tool or provide alternatives, the given scenarios provide sufficient context for an AI agent.

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