Get Payment Link

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

The description adds the behavioral nuance that either link_id or reference_number can be used for lookup, which is not in the annotations. Since readOnlyHint and idempotentHint already disclose the safety profile, the description's contribution is modest. It does not mention behavior when both or neither parameters are provided.

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 that conveys the essential purpose and lookup methods without any redundant text. Every phrase earns its place.

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 read-only tool with strong annotations and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers the two identifiers and the action. The only gap is lack of guidance on how to handle the optional parameters together, which is a minor omission given the tool's simplicity.

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 schema already documents both parameters. The description adds that they are alternative lookup keys, but does not clarify exclusivity or order of precedence when both are supplied. This does not meaningfully exceed the baseline set by the schema.

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's purpose: 'Retrieve a Payment Link' with two distinct lookup methods (link_id or reference_number). This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_checkout or get_payment_intent, which target different resources.

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 indicates when to use the tool: when you have a link_id or a reference_number. It provides clear context for the intended use case. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools for other scenarios, so it stops short of a perfect score.

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