select_wallet

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false), idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds the runtime switching aspect and the Encrypted Storage mode constraint, providing useful context beyond the annotations. No contradiction.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. No filler or redundant information. Every word earns its place.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, this description is complete. It covers what the tool does, how to get inputs, and a critical precondition (mode). Annotations cover the safety profile.

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 schema covers the single parameter (walletId) with 100% coverage. The description adds context on how to obtain valid wallet IDs (via list_wallets), which gives the parameter practical meaning. This exceeds the baseline for schema-only coverage.

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 action ('Switch the active wallet') and the resource ('at runtime'). It distinguishes from siblings by referencing list_wallets, which is relevant since list_wallets is a sibling tool. The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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 usage context: use list_wallets to find wallet IDs, and notes the Encrypted Storage mode requirement. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, but it gives clear prerequisites and conditions for use.

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