sui_wallet_reject

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the basic action without explaining side effects (e.g., irreversibility, permission requirements, or state changes after rejection). This lack of detail reduces transparency.

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 a single sentence that directly conveys the purpose without extraneous information. It is appropriately sized and 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 tool is simple with one parameter, so the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks details on return values, error conditions, and behavioral context, which a complete description for a mutation tool should include.

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% with a brief description for 'requestId'. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. For high-coverage schemas, baseline is 3, and this is met.

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?

Description clearly states the action ('Reject') and the resource ('a pending transaction by request ID'). It directly addresses the tool's primary function and distinguishes it from siblings like 'sui_wallet_approve'.

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 implies the tool is used for rejecting pending transactions by request ID, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., 'sui_wallet_approve'), nor does it mention prerequisites or context where this tool is appropriate.

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