archive_wallets

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

With no annotations, the description should explain behavioral traits (e.g., side effects, reversibility, error handling). It only states the action and return type, omitting critical details like what 'archive' entails or what happens on failure.

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?

Two efficient sentences: first states action, second describes input and output. No filler, front-loaded appropriately.

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 annotations and sibling differentiation, the description is incomplete. It omits the purpose of archiving, effect on wallets, and when to use this tool versus 'archive_wallet_group' or 'unarchive_wallets'. The output type is mentioned but not explained.

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 the description must compensate. It clarifies that the tool 'expects a list of wallet names', which maps to the nested container structure. But it adds no details about valid values or format, so improvement over schema is minimal.

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 action ('Archive wallets') and mentions the input and output types. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'archive_wallet_group' or 'unarchive_wallets', so clarity is good but not excellent.

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 over alternatives, nor any prerequisites or context. The agent receives no help in deciding between this and related tools.

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