get_client_token

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. Discloses auth requirement (X-AUTH-TOKEN), gateway-agnostic nature, and customerId requirement nuance. Does not describe return format or side effects, but for a read-like operation this is sufficient.

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?

Four sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with purpose and usage, then details. Efficiently conveys all necessary 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?

Given no output schema, description explains the token's purpose and usage flow. Mentions auth requirement. Lacks explicit return format or error handling, but is adequate for a simple token retrieval tool.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage and already describes both parameters. Description adds minimal extra context (e.g., 'for vault') that is already implied. Baseline score of 3 due to high schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'get', resource 'gateway client credential', and its purpose to initialize payment integration and produce a paymentMethodNonce. Distinguishes from sibling tools like create_customer_payment_method by describing the token as a prerequisite.

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 instructs to use returned value in hosted payment UI then pass as paymentMethodNonce to create_customer_payment_method, indicating when to use. Also notes gateway-agnostic and customerId scoping. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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