List Payout Wallets

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

With readOnlyHint already declaring the safe-read behavior, the description adds useful context: wallets are per-network, their ids are consumed by paywalls, and wallet creation happens only in the dashboard. It does not describe return format or pagination, but the annotation covers the safety profile.

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 three short sentences with the resource front-loaded and no redundant explanation. Every sentence adds a distinct fact about wallets, their ids, or their creation constraint.

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 zero-argument read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description covers the key context: what is listed, that ids are one per network, and that wallets cannot be added through this API. A brief note on return ordering or fields could help, but nothing critical is missing.

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?

This tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for a parameterless tool is 4.

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 title supplies the verb 'List' and the description identifies the resource as 'The account's payout wallets,' making the purpose clear. It does not differentiate this tool from siblings such as list_vault, but the resource itself is unambiguous.

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 notes that paywalls use these ids and that wallets can only be added in the dashboard, but it gives no explicit guidance on when an agent should call list_wallets versus other list tools. Usage is only indirectly implied.

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