payway_check_transaction

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the important 7-day limitation and implies a read-only status check, but it does not describe the return format, failure behavior, or any authorization requirements.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action, target, and key constraint efficiently.

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 one-parameter status-check tool, the description covers the core purpose and a critical constraint. However, without an output schema or annotations, the agent is left without information about the expected response shape or any edge-case behavior, so completeness is only moderate.

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 0%, and the description only mentions that the transaction must be from the last 7 days. It does not explain how to obtain tran_id, what kind of identifier it is, or any format beyond the schema's string type and maxLength. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description adds little semantic value.

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 a specific action (check status) on a specific resource (a transaction), with a meaningful scope constraint (created within last 7 days). It does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling payway_get_transaction_details, but the verb and recency window provide reasonable clarity.

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?

There is no guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives like payway_get_transaction_details or payway_get_transaction_list. The 7-day constraint implies a limited scope, but no explicit when/when-not or alternative routing is provided.

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