nansen: nansen_wallet_profiler

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds scope (date range) but lacks details on pagination (per_page parameter), data aggregation, or output format. With annotations present, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

Single sentence, 14 words, front-loaded with purpose. No waste; 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?

Tool is simple with 5 params and annotations. Description covers core outputs but lacks details on return structure (time series vs aggregated), pagination behavior implied by per_page, or any edge cases. Still fairly complete for its simplicity.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description does not add meaning beyond schema; it mentions outputs (trading activity, PnL) but not parameters. No additional clarification over the schema descriptions.

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 'profile a specific wallet' with specifics (trading activity, PnL, token trades over date range). Verb and resource are clear, and it distinguishes from sibling Nansen tools that cover leaderboards, smart money flows, etc.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternatives mentioned. While the description implies use for wallet profiling, it does not guide the agent on when to choose this over similar Nansen tools like nansen_pnl_leaderboard or nansen_smart_money_flows.

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