ghl_marketplace_charge

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds endpoint details and OAuth scopes, which provide some behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it does not disclose side effects, idempotency implications (idempotentHint=false), or what happens on success/failure.

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 very concise (3 lines) with no redundant information. It front-loads the purpose and includes essential technical details (endpoint, scopes) without verbosity.

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 complexity (nested body object, 10 parameters, no output schema), the description is minimal. It omits explanation of return values or behavior on error, but the schema compensates. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameter semantics are adequately documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning or usage hints for parameters beyond what's already in the input schema.

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 'Create a new wallet charge', which is a specific verb+resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ghl_marketplace_delete_charge or ghl_marketplace_get_charges.

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 versus its siblings or any prerequisites. The description only provides the endpoint and OAuth scopes, but does not explain context such as 'use this to bill a sub-account' vs other methods.

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