Nạp ví bằng VietQR

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that this is not a final payment but a step that returns a VietQR for a human to pay, implying the wallet credit is not immediate. It does not disclose cancellation, expiry, idempotency behavior, or post-payment verification, but the human-payment trait is a meaningful disclosure.

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 compact sentence with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the human-payment caveat is placed as a clarifying second clause, giving high information density.

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?

With no output schema, the description must explain what the agent receives and how to use the returned VietQR, but it only says 'returns VietQR'. It also omits the role of idempotency_key and any post-payment status flow, leaving the agent without enough to handle the full top-up workflow.

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 schema descriptions cover only amount (integer VND) and leave idempotency_key undocumented. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning, so an agent cannot infer why idempotency_key is needed or how the amount relates to the returned QR beyond what the schema already states.

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 states a specific action ('Tạo yêu cầu nạp ví') and its result ('trả VietQR'), making the tool's purpose clear. It also adds the key distinction that the QR is for a human to complete payment, which differentiates it from generic QR/checkout siblings, though it does not name any alternative explicitly.

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 implies the tool should be used when a wallet top-up requires a human payment step, which is useful context. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over monapay_create_qr, monapay_create_checkout, or other payment-related siblings, and no exclusions or prerequisites.

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