get_payee

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It explains the behavior of exclude_fields in detail, but omits other aspects like idempotency, error handling (e.g., not found), or auth requirements. The read-only nature is implied but not stated.

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 concise and well-structured with a docstring-style args list. The first sentence is direct. The explanation of exclude_fields is slightly lengthy but necessary for clarity. No extraneous information.

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 simple retrieval tool with an output schema (implied), the description covers all necessary aspects: it states what the tool does, explains all parameters, and provides a helpful cross-reference. There are no gaps given the low complexity.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It does so effectively, explaining that plan_id can be found via list_plans, and detailing the exclude_fields behavior including default, null pass, and custom overrides. This adds substantial value beyond the raw 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 'Get a single payee', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like list_payees (lists multiple) and update_payee (modifies), so the purpose is unambiguous.

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 provides context for using plan_id by referencing list_plans, and explains exclude_fields options. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, the purpose of retrieving a single payee by ID is clear, and the cross-reference aids correct usage.

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