add_wallets_to_group

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and return type but omits important traits such as idempotency, side effects, error conditions, or what happens if a wallet is already in the group. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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 concise at two sentences with no fluff. However, the second sentence is slightly inaccurate regarding parameters, which detracts from efficiency. It could be improved by accurately describing the input structure.

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 nested input schema and lack of annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the nested structure, does not mention that each wallet request can have a different group, and does not describe the output schema beyond its name. An output schema exists but is not elaborated.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It says 'Expects the group name and a list of wallet names', which is misleading because the schema expects a single nested parameter containing an array of objects, each with a group and wallet. It fails to clarify the structure or that the group is per wallet, not a single group.

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 'Add wallets to a specified group', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'remove_wallets_from_group'. However, it is slightly ambiguous about the group parameter being per wallet rather than a single group for all, so it loses a point for precision.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'remove_wallets_from_group' or 'list_groups'. It lacks any context about prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions.

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