GetV1InstancesCustomersWalletsRetrieves wallets for a specified customer within a given instance using the required instance and customer IDs.
Retrieve Wallets
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| customer_id | Yes | Customer ID | |
| instance_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.9.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare this as read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive. The description adds no behavioral context such as pagination, filters, auth requirements, or response shape, so it contributes almost nothing beyond the annotations and name.
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?
It is extremely short, but the brevity reflects under-specification rather than efficient communication. Two words do not adequately front-load the endpoint's scope or distinguish it from sibling wallet tools.
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 dense sibling namespace, 50% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is insufficient for reliable selection and invocation. It omits key distinctions between list and by-ID wallet operations and does not explain the return behavior.
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 is described, but instance_id is not. The description provides no parameter guidance at all, so it does not compensate for the undocumented instance_id or clarify scoping.
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 says 'Retrieve Wallets,' which gives a verb and a resource but does not clarify whether this lists wallets, returns a single wallet, or how it differs from GetV1InstancesCustomersWalletsById or the BlockchainWallets siblings. The intent is only minimally interpretable from the name.
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 when-to-use guidance is provided. It does not explain when to use this list endpoint versus GetV1InstancesCustomersWalletsById, BlockchainWallets, or wallet balance/deposit endpoints, leaving the agent to infer from naming conventions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.