Get document payment

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

With annotations already declaring read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, the description adds valuable context: returning all fields by default and monetary values in cents. This goes beyond annotations and helps set expectations for the response format and units.

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, front-loaded with purpose, followed by alternative usage and a key data-format note. Every sentence contributes value without redundancy, making it efficient and easy to scan.

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 get-by-ID operation, the description is complete: it states the input, default behavior, optional narrowing, and an important monetary unit detail. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by the default-return statement, though it doesn't enumerate exact return fields beyond 'all fields by default'.

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 provides 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all three parameters, including the 'fields' array and response_format enum. The description's 'Pass fields to narrow the response' reinforces but doesn't add new parameter semantics; the cents note is about return data rather than parameters.

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 tool fetches one document payment by its numeric easybill ID, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like easybill_list_document_payments by emphasizing 'one' vs. listing.

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?

It explicitly advises using easybill_list_document_payments when only a name or number is known, providing a clear alternative for a specific condition. While it doesn't exhaustively list all exclusions, it gives practical guidance for when to use this getter vs. the list counterpart.

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