list_owned_objects

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 discloses key behavioral traits such as 'raw' (no kiosk resolution, no display metadata) and pagination support. However, it does not explain the return format or any potential limitations, leaving some ambiguity for a tool that lists raw objects.

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?

Two concise, front-loaded sentences. The first sentence states the core function; the second gives alternative guidance. No filler or redundancy.

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 has no output schema, so return values are not documented. While the description clearly covers primary purpose and when to use alternatives, it leaves the exact structure of a 'raw object' response unspecified. Given the schema covers all parameters and the alternatives are well-stated, the description is mostly complete but not fully.

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 fully documents all 5 parameters. The description merely mentions 'optional type filter and pagination', adding no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

States clearly it lists raw Sui objects owned by an address, with optional type filter and pagination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly contrasting with list_nfts and get_wallet_overview.

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 when-to-use guidance by directing NFT queries to list_nfts and wallet summaries to get_wallet_overview. This clearly maps scenarios to the right tool.

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