wallet_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose that a password is required to verify ownership, which is a real behavioral trait. However, for a destructive wallet operation it omits whether deletion is irreversible, what happens to funds/keys, and any confirmation behavior — gaps a delete tool should address.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the destructive action first and the auth requirement immediately after; no wasted text.

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?

For a destructive, two-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the auth requirement but says nothing about irreversibility or consequences. It is minimally adequate but not complete for a delete operation.

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 100% and both parameters are already documented ("Keystore password to verify ownership", "Wallet ID (UUID)"). The description's note about password ownership verification largely restates the schema, so it adds little beyond the baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Delete a stored wallet"), which is unambiguous and easily separated from the sign/list/generate siblings. It does not explicitly name or contrast with any sibling, but the operation itself is clear.

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 parenthetical gives a prerequisite (password needed to confirm ownership) but offers no when-to-use vs. when-not guidance or alternatives among the wallet_* family. Usage is only implied by the verb.

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