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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does note the tool is display-only and optionally filterable, which is useful. However, it lacks detail on response behavior, error conditions, or the meaning of 'async defined per user grouping,' and the description is truncated mid-sentence.

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 repeats the same opening sentence nearly verbatim and cuts off mid-phrase with 'any asse,' making it appear incomplete and unpolished. The @param block is useful but the overall structure is redundant and not concise.

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?

The tool is a relatively simple list operation and an output schema exists, so return values are covered. Still, the description omits usage guidance and contains vague wording about async grouping, leaving the overall context somewhat incomplete. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 @param section in the description is essential. It names all four parameters and adds meaningful context: token and wallet_fk are 'provided by /access/login' and blockchain_fk is described as a filter. This compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 tool provides a detailed list of wallet assets and can be filtered by blockchain, which communicates the core function. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like wallet_accounts_list, and the phrase 'as async defined per user grouping' adds confusion.

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 states 'for display purposes only,' which implies a read-only usage context, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tool references are provided.

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