capture

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It implies mutation ('capture') but fails to describe side effects (e.g., authorization consumed, funds settled), idempotency, or error scenarios if payment is not authorized.

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 with no wasted words. However, it could include additional context like return value or prerequisite without losing brevity.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema and sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It lacks information on return values, error handling, and how to distinguish from similar actions like 'void' or 'refund'.

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 description adds no extra meaning beyond the input schema, which already fully describes both parameters (payment_id required, amount optional for partial capture). Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline of 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?

The description 'Capture an authorized payment' clearly states the action (capture) and resource (authorized payment). It is distinct from sibling tools like 'create_payment' and 'refund' in a general sense, but does not explicitly differentiate from 'void' or specify the payment's state requirement.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not state when to use capture versus alternatives like refund or void, nor does it mention required preconditions (e.g., payment must be in 'authorized' state).

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