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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the side effect of taking a baseline snapshot, which is useful. However, it does not mention behavior for duplicate addresses, error conditions, or whether adding is reversible or updates existing watchlist entries.

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 three sentences with no filler: the main action, the side-effect context, and parameter guidance. Every sentence earns its place and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 description explains the core purpose and snapshot behavior, but with no output schema and no annotations, it omits return value details and edge cases like re-adding an existing wallet. It is adequate for a simple add operation 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters. The description adds minor value by explaining alert_threshold_matic as sensitivity tuning and noting tags are free-form, but these are largely redundant with the 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 'Add a Polygon wallet to the PredictionGuard watchlist,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pg_whale_remove, pg_whale_scan, and pg_whale_list by clearly naming the add-to-watchlist action.

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 provides clear usage context by explaining that an initial baseline snapshot is taken for subsequent pg_whale_scan calls, implying this tool is the setup step before scanning. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the sibling tool names make the differentiation clear.

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