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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds that the tool returns sizes and metadata, which is useful but does not disclose other behavioral traits (e.g., pagination, rate limits, data freshness).

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 but contains redundancy: 'FREE. (FREE)' adds no value. The first sentence is efficient, but the repeated 'FREE' detracts from conciseness.

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 a simple list operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It explains the core functionality and return content, but lacks details on potential limitations (e.g., total assets, performance) or output structure.

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% (parameter 'wallet' has a description). The tool description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond that, so baseline score of 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 explicitly states 'List all assets in your wallet storage with sizes and metadata,' which clearly identifies the action (list) and resource (assets). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_asset (single asset) and search_artworks (search across artworks).

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?

No usage guidance is provided. There is no indication of when to use this tool vs. alternatives like search_artworks or get_asset. The mention of 'FREE' is not contextual guidance.

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