Get wallet overview

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

Annotations already cover read-only and open-world hints, lowering the burden. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail by listing what the overview includes (token balances, SuiNS name, staked SUI, kiosk/NFT count, recent transactions) and how include_prices changes the output. No contradiction with annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded with the most important usage signal ('Recommended first tool for wallets'). Every sentence earns its place: what it returns, how to get prices, and when to use it.

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?

For a read-only overview tool, the description is largely complete: it lists return contents, explains the optional price flag, and gives usage positioning. Parameters are fully covered by the schema, and annotations cover safety. Minor gaps like output shape or pagination are acceptable given no output schema.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds only marginal reinforcement for include_prices ('Set include_prices=true for USD values'), which does not meaningfully exceed the schema's existing description.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Get a comprehensive overview of a Sui wallet') and enumerates the exact contents returned. It distinguishes itself from siblings by positioning itself as the recommended first tool and the entry point before drilling into specific tools.

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 clearly states when to use it: 'Recommended first tool for wallets' and 'Start here before drilling into specific tools.' It gives clear context for selection, though it does not explicitly name sibling 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.