wallet_stream_sample

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only says 'open and collect events'. It does not disclose whether the stream is continuous, how it terminates, if it requires authentication, or what events are collected. Essential behavioral traits like resource consumption or side effects are missing.

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 efficient sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource. It avoids verbosity, but could include brief parameter details without losing conciseness.

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 no output schema, 3 parameters, and a complex streaming behavior, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain event types, stream lifespan, output format, or practical usage. Sibling tools provide richer context for similar functions.

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 0%, so description must compensate. However, only 'selected wallets' is hinted; the roles of 'durationMs' and 'maxEvents' are not explained. Parameter names give weak hints, but the description adds no explicit semantics.

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 opens a websocket stream and collects events for selected wallets. It is specific about the resource (wallet websocket stream) and action (open and collect), but does not differentiate from sibling tools like wallet_get_trade_history or wallet_get_holdings, which also involve wallet data.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention typical use cases, prerequisites, or when not to use it. For example, a user might need to compare with market_stream_sample or wallet_get_trade_history, but no such context is provided.

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