create_wallet

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions input/output format (list of names, returns WalletInfo) but omits details like idempotency, duplicate handling, limits, or side effects. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the core action, followed by precise input/output expectations.

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?

Despite missing behavioral details, the description covers the essential input/output contract. The existence of an output schema (though not shown) reduces the need to explain return values. However, for a creation tool, more context (e.g., idempotency, conflicts) would be beneficial.

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 low (0% for main parameter containers), but the description clarifies that a list of wallet names is expected. It adds some meaning beyond the schema, which shows nested objects with name property. However, it does not fully compensate for coverage gaps.

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 'Create new wallets', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like rename_wallets or archive_wallets, as creating is a distinct action.

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 (e.g., add_wallets_to_group). The description implies usage for creation but lacks exclusions or context-specific recommendations.

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