Wallet & payment status

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

The description explicitly states that the tool never reveals the private key, addressing a critical security concern. Since no annotations are present, this behavioral disclosure is valuable. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or idempotent, which would further improve 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 front-loads all key information: the reported items and the security guarantee. Every phrase adds value, with no redundancy or vague language. It is optimally concise.

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 lack of parameters and output schema, the description provides a complete picture of the tool's output. It covers all relevant details (payment mode, wallet address, balances, spend cap, funding instructions) and the security constraint. No additional context is needed for an agent to understand its use.

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 input schema has zero parameters, and the description provides full coverage of what the tool returns. This adds meaning beyond the empty schema by listing the exact fields reported. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description's list of fields justifies a higher score.

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 tool reports specific wallet and payment status information: payment mode, wallet address, USDC/ETH balance, spend cap, and funding instructions. The verb 'report' and the listed items precisely define the tool's functionality, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'get_payment_info' which may focus on payment info only.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not advise when to use this tool over siblings such as 'get_payment_info', nor does it mention prerequisites or context. The agent receives no guidance on when 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.