set_default_wallet

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention side effects (e.g., that this changes the default for future transactions), permission requirements, return value, or whether the change is persistent. This is a mutation tool with no disclosure beyond the basic effect.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It efficiently communicates the action and scope without redundant details.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), and the description covers the core purpose. However, it lacks information about what the tool returns, whether the operation requires authentication, and what happens if the wallet_id is invalid. This leaves gaps for an agent to confidently invoke the tool in a real workflow.

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?

The schema already documents the single parameter wallet_id as 'The wallet ID to set as default', so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds marginal context about wallet types (BTC or USD) but does not provide any additional syntax, format, or validation details beyond what the schema gives.

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 uses the specific verb 'Set' and identifies the resource as 'default wallet for the account', with the explicit parenthetical '(BTC or USD wallet)' which adds helpful context. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like set_display_currency or set_username.

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 makes the action obvious but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusion criteria. Sibling tools like set_display_currency are related but distinct, and no guidance is given for choosing between them.

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