List the most recent WagerX real-money casino audits, newest first, each with real deposit/withdrawal amounts, payout timing and support response. Use for "What are the latest casino audits?", "Which casinos were tested this week?", "freshest crypto casino safety data". Example call: {"limit": 5}.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clarifies that the audits are 'real-money' and include real amounts, which adds some transparency, but it does not explicitly state side effects, read-only status, rate limits, or other behavioral details. The list nature is implied rather than stated.
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 two sentences plus a compact example. Every element earns its place: the action, the data details, the example queries, and the sample call. No filler or repetition.
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?
Despite having no output schema, the description enumerates what each audit contains (deposit/withdrawal amounts, payout timing, support response), giving the agent a clear expectation of the return value. The single parameter is well-scoped by the schema, and the description effectively covers the tool's purpose and usage.
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 0%, so the description must compensate. It includes an example call with limit=5, suggesting the parameter controls the number of audits, but it does not explicitly define the parameter's meaning. The schema already provides min/max/default, so the example adds some semantic value beyond the 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 opens with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('most recent WagerX real-money casino audits'), includes ordering ('newest first'), and details the content (deposit/withdrawal amounts, payout timing, support response). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like best_bonuses or list_casinos.
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?
Provides explicit natural-language queries for when to use the tool ('What are the latest casino audits?', 'Which casinos were tested this week?', 'freshest crypto casino safety data'). This gives clear usage context, though it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: bonuses, individual audits, comparisons, recent audits, full list, historical age, new entries, regulatory context, and top-ranked casinos. There is minimal overlap, and descriptions specify exact use cases for each.
All names follow a consistent snake_case style with descriptive prefixes (verbs or adjectives) followed by a resource noun (e.g., check_casino, best_bonuses). While not a uniform verb_noun pattern, the naming is predictable and readable.
Nine tools is well-scoped for a domain covering casino audits, bonuses, comparisons, regulatory info, and lists. Each tool contributes a distinct function without excessive overlap or redundancy.
The tool surface covers the full lifecycle of a user's needs: discovering casinos, evaluating safety via audits, comparing options, accessing recent data, and understanding regulatory context. No obvious gaps for the stated purpose.