create_payment

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

Description adds idempotency detail via RqUID beyond annotations (idempotentHint=true). It also states it's a monetary transaction (destructive). No contradiction with annotations, but does not disclose failure modes, permissions, or other side effects.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Each sentence adds essential information (operation and idempotency). No redundancy or unnecessary words.

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?

Despite full schema coverage, the description lacks information on success/failure behavior, return format (no output schema), validation rules, and prerequisites. For a critical financial operation, this is insufficient for confident 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 7 parameters. The description does not elaborate on any parameter meaning beyond the schema, so it adds no extra value. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states 'Creating a payment order', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools which are all read-only or informational, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, though sibling tools are all read-only, implying usage. The idempotency note provides indirect guidance about safe retries, but prerequisites or edge cases are not mentioned.

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