list_payments

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention key behaviors such as pagination (page/limit parameters), default ordering, idempotency, or any side effects. The simple phrase 'with filters' does not convey that results are paginated or limited to a maximum of 100 items per page, which is essential for correct invocation.

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?

At three words, the description is very concise and front-loaded. However, it sacrifices informative content for brevity. While not verbose, it could be improved by adding a short sentence about pagination or filtering options without becoming overly long.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not mention the response format, default pagination behavior, or ordering of results. For a list tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description should provide more context about the returned data and any limitations (e.g., maximum results).

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?

All three parameters (page, limit, status) have descriptions in the input schema, achieving 100% coverage. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score 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 'List payments with filters' clearly states the tool's purpose: to retrieve a list of payments with optional filtering. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_payment (which retrieves a single payment) or capture/refund (which modify payments), but the verb 'list' and the mention of filters provide sufficient context for distinction.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_payment for a specific payment or capture for modifying payment state. The description lacks context on typical use cases or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage without explicit direction.

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