get-payees

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

The verb 'Retrieve' clearly indicates a read-only operation and 'all payees' clarifies that results are unfiltered. However, because no annotations are provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden; it does not disclose result ordering, pagination, nullability of fields, or how errors are handled.

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?

A single sentence states the action, resource, scope, and returned fields with no filler. The key information is front-loaded and every word contributes.

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 zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it identifies the resource, scope, and exact return fields. Minor omissions such as sort order and response format prevent a perfect score, but they are unlikely to block correct invocation.

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 tool accepts zero parameters and the input schema explicitly states 'This tool does not accept any arguments.' With 100% schema coverage, the description does not need to add parameter detail; the baseline of 4 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') with a concrete resource ('all payees') and enumerates the returned fields (id, name, categoryId, transferAccountId). The resource is unique among the sibling tools, so there is no ambiguity about what this tool returns.

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 implies usage when a complete payee list is needed, and no sibling tool is payee-specific, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or any exclusion criteria. Usage context must be inferred from the tool name and resource rather than stated.

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