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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, it discloses a critical safety behavior: expected_total must match the cart total to the cent or nothing is charged. It also flags the required money scope and prerequisite calls, giving the agent important operational context.

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?

Three short sentences front-load the purpose and then deliver the safety and prerequisite guidance. No filler or redundant restating of the schema.

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 destructive financial action, the description covers the key safety guardrail, prerequisites, and scope. It does not mention success/error response behavior, but that is not required to invoke the tool correctly and there is no output schema.

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 description adds meaning to expected_total by explaining it is 'what you told the client' and must match the cart total, which is not fully captured by the schema. It also connects client_id and product_id to the prerequisite list_products and get_client calls, though quantity and client_id remain somewhat implicit.

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 action: selling a product and charging a client's saved card. This distinguishes it from siblings like refund_order or adjust_account_balance without ambiguity.

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?

It gives explicit prerequisites ('Run list_products and get_client first') and clear context for when to use it. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but no close alternative exists among the listed siblings.

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