Get payment method list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds useful behavioral context: the returned methods are limited to those usable for new orders, and the API cannot add new payment methods. It does not describe the response structure, but for a zero-parameter read-only list this is a minor omission.

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-loaded with the primary action. The hPanel alternative is useful, but the final sentence partly restates the first sentence's 'placing new orders' context, so it is slightly redundant rather than fully earning its place.

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 read-only, zero-parameter endpoint with no output schema, the description covers the purpose, the business context, and the relevant external alternative. Nothing needed for correct selection or invocation is missing.

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 no parameters, so the input schema is complete and the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter-level detail since there is nothing to document.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and a clear resource ('available payment methods') with an explicit scope ('that can be used for placing new orders'). This makes the tool's purpose unmistakable and distinguishes it from related billing list endpoints like billing_getSubscriptionListV1 or billing_getCatalogItemListV1.

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 explicitly states when to use this endpoint ('view available payment options before creating orders') and provides a clear exclusion for a related need: adding a new payment method should go through hPanel, not this API. This gives the agent actionable routing guidance without ambiguity.

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