Get Wallet

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

Annotations already establish readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context by declaring this the authoritative balance source and specifying the return shape. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and uses clear sections for args, returns, and examples. It is somewhat longer than necessary because the Args section repeats schema information, but the examples provide real agent-routing value.

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?

With no output schema, the description fully compensates by providing the return object shape and field meanings. It also covers parameter behavior, common user intents, and how to extract balances/addresses, so an agent has enough to invoke and interpret the result correctly.

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 baseline is 3. The description's chainId line mostly restates the schema's 'Optional EVM chain ID to scope the portfolio' rather than adding new semantic detail.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Returns the user's full wallet overview including NGN balance and all subwallets (EVM and Solana).' This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like monei_get_evm_portfolio and monei_get_solana_portfolio, which expose only a subset.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this at the start of any transaction flow to confirm the user has sufficient balance before attempting sends, swaps, or offramp.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the 'single source of truth' framing makes the intended primary use clear.

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