list_payments

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the underlying API endpoint (GET /v1/payments), the return structure (dict with total and payments[]), and key fields. It also clarifies that only enabled payments are returned. This goes beyond a minimal description, though it omits potential edge cases like pagination or error behavior.

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 well-structured into purpose, API, and return sections. It is slightly verbose but every section adds relevant information. The main sentence is front-loaded and clear, with no redundant filler.

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 zero-parameter list tool, the description covers purpose, use cases, API endpoint, and return structure. It lacks details like pagination or authentication requirements, but those are likely unnecessary for this tool's simplicity. Overall, it is reasonably complete.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the input schema is empty and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by detailing the return structure and field names, which is useful for an agent even without parameters.

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 function as retrieving the store's enabled payment methods (取得商店啟用的付款方式清單), with specific examples like credit card, ATM, and cash on delivery. This is a specific verb+resource statement that distinguishes it from other list_* siblings.

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 provides clear use cases: confirming available payment channels and as a reference for order payment analysis. It does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide when to use it.

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