Get Instances Customers Blockchain Wallets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds nothing beyond that — no scoping behavior, no pagination or filtering note, no hint that results are limited to one customer's wallets.

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?

Three words are concise but under-specified rather than efficient: for a list endpoint with eight same-family siblings, the description should be doing routing work and is not. Nothing is front-loaded because there is nothing to load.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should at least characterize what comes back (a list of blockchain wallets for a customer). It does not, and nothing compensates for the 50% parameter coverage or the dense sibling cluster.

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 only 50%: customer_id has a bare schema description ("Customer ID") and instance_id has none at all. The description contributes no parameter meaning, so the gap in the schema is left entirely unfilled.

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?

"Retrieve Blockchain Wallets" names a verb and a resource, so the basic operation is clear, but it is essentially a restatement of the tool name/title. It never says this is a list endpoint scoped to one customer within one instance, nor does it distinguish it from closely-named siblings such as ...BlockchainWalletsById or ...BlockchainWalletsSignMessage.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance at all. With siblings like GetV1InstancesCustomersBlockchainWalletsById, PostV1InstancesCustomersBlockchainWallets, and GetV1InstancesCustomersBlockchainWalletsSignMessage, the agent gets no help choosing this tool over them.

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