List payments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds that amount values are in kobo and that expand[]=customer embeds the customer object, but it does not add pagination behavior, rate limits, or return-shape context beyond the schema.

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 short and front-loaded, but it redundantly repeats "List payments." as a standalone line and again in the next sentence. Apart from that duplication, the filter summary is dense and efficient.

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 an 11-parameter list endpoint with nested amount and created filters, the schema is fully documented and annotations cover the safety profile. The description mentions the main filters and expand behavior, but it omits q search, limit, pagination cursors, and return-value context, so it is adequate rather than complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 11 parameters. The description repeats key filters and the expand option but adds little syntax or meaning beyond the schema, and it omits mention of q, limit, and cursors that the schema documents.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List payments") and enumerates filter dimensions, making it clear this is a collection endpoint. It does not explicitly name sibling tools such as get_payment or get_payment_by_reference, but the name and filter summary distinguish it adequately.

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?

Usage is implied by the list semantics and by listing filterable fields, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or named alternative. An agent must infer that single-payment retrieval belongs to get_payment or get_payment_by_reference.

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