create_payment_out

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the basic action and currency, omitting important aspects such as whether expense_item_href is required in some cases, side effects, or prerequisites. This is a significant gap for a create tool.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core action and currency. Every word earns its place, and there is no unnecessary elaboration.

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 create operation with 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not mention required fields, conditional requirements (like expense_item_href), or what the response will contain. The schema covers parameters but not the broader execution context.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only 'Amount in RUBLES,' which is already covered by the schema's parameter description. It provides no additional meaning or context for the 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 action ('Create'), the resource ('outgoing bank payment'), and a key constraint ('Amount in RUBLES'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_payment_in and create_cash_out.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., cash payments or incoming payments). The only hint is the inherent 'outgoing bank' qualifier, but there is no explicit mention of when not to use it or which sibling to choose.

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