list_payment_intents

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description's 'Lists...' is consistent, adding no contradiction. The description hints at 'recent' ordering but does not elaborate on other behaviors (e.g., pagination, response structure). Since annotations cover safety, the description adds minimal extra transparency.

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, no unnecessary words. The core purpose is front-loaded. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 list tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose and basic usage. It implies the return is a list and that results are ordered by recency. It does not need to restate schema details. Slight lack of explicit ordering or pagination info, but complete enough given simplicity.

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 a clear description for 'limit' (max 100, default 10). The description mentions 'by date' without a date parameter, which is slightly misleading but not harmful. It adds a use case but no new semantic detail beyond the schema. 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?

The description specifies 'Lists recent PaymentIntents,' clearly identifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_payment_intent' (single) and other list tools by resource name. The added context about 'latest transactions' or 'finding by date' reinforces the purpose.

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 mentions use cases ('seeing latest transactions' or 'finding a specific one by date') but does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or provide alternatives (e.g., use 'get_payment_intent' for a specific ID). Some guidance is present but incomplete.

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