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

The description notes authentication requirements, but annotations are empty. Beyond auth, no further behavioral traits (e.g., side effects, read-only nature) are disclosed. Since annotations provide no safety profile, the description could provide more detail on what the tool does internally.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, front-loading the purpose and including auth instructions. No wasted words.

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 the tool has no output schema, the description gives a basic idea of the return value ('wallet information with active deposit invoice'). It is sufficient for a simple retrieval tool, but could be more specific about what fields are included.

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 input schema fully describes the single optional parameter 'currency' with format and default behavior. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, 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 clearly states the tool retrieves the authenticated agent's wallet information including an active deposit invoice. It is distinct from sibling tools like get-wallet-transactions or get-wallet-usage, which focus on different aspects.

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 mentions authentication requirement and how to pass the API key, providing clear usage context. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like get-wallet-transactions or get-wallet-usage, which could help the agent decide.

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