hackerone_list_payouts

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 only gives a noun phrase and a parenthetical list of fields; it does not mention pagination behavior, authentication requirements, sorting, or whether the response includes pending and completed payouts.

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 short and front-loads the resource, with the returned fields in a compact parenthetical. It is efficiently written, though slightly too terse to fully stand alone.

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, one-optional-parameter list tool, the description covers the core resource and returned fields. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it should also clarify pagination defaults and the scope of 'your' payouts to be fully complete. This is a minimum-viable description with notable gaps.

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?

There is a single optional parameter, page_size, and the schema already documents its range, minimum, maximum, and default (100% coverage). The description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 identifies the resource ('payout transactions') and the fields returned (provider, status, amounts), so an agent can infer the tool is about payouts. However, it lacks an explicit verb (e.g., 'list'), relying on the tool name, and it does not distinguish itself from related siblings like get_earnings or get_balance.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool instead of sibling tools such as hackerone_get_earnings, hackerone_get_balance, or hackerone_program_balance. The agent must guess the appropriate context from the resource name alone.

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