secret_key_to_mnemonic

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the conversion action but does not describe side effects, security implications, error handling, or output format. For a tool handling cryptographic keys, this lack of detail is a significant gap.

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, direct sentence with zero waste. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, clearly stating the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given the complexity of cryptographic key conversion, the lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the mnemonic format, security considerations, or error cases, leaving critical gaps for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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 the three parameters. The description does not add any semantic details beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining the purpose of 'network' or 'itemsPerPage' in the conversion context. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Convert a secret key to a mnemonic' clearly states the verb ('convert') and resource ('secret key to mnemonic'), making the purpose understandable. However, it lacks specificity about the conversion process (e.g., format or algorithm) and does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'mdk_to_mnemonic' or 'mnemonic_to_secret_key', which are related but inverse operations.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, typical use cases, or how it relates to sibling tools such as 'mdk_to_mnemonic' or 'mnemonic_to_secret_key'. This leaves the agent without context for tool selection.

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