settle

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool claims funds (likely a transfer) and specifies the caller. However, it does not disclose behavior if called too early, error states, whether it's irreversible, or required permissions beyond 'payee.'

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states purpose, second states caller, third gives exact call format. Front-loaded 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?

Given the tool has only one parameter, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description provides all necessary information: purpose, caller, and exact usage format. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke 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 100% coverage with a clear description for 'paymentAddress'. The description adds an example call with the parameter, but does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('claim payment funds'), the resource ('payment funds'), and a condition ('after the settlement window has passed'). It also specifies the caller ('Only the payee should call this.'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like refund or raise_dispute.

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 states who should call ('Only the payee') and provides an exact JSON call example. While it doesn't explicitly list when not to use, the context implies it's for claiming after settlement window. Sibling tool names (e.g., refund, raise_dispute) provide implicit alternatives.

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