queryWithdrawAddresses

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

With no annotations, the description covers key behaviors: parameter interactions (addressType ignoring coin/chain), filtering of failed verification, security policy effects on new address status, and the use of baseCoin for universal addresses. However, it omits behavior for addressType 0 and pagination details.

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: a one-line purpose followed by bullet-pointed business rules. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers main behaviors and parameter interactions but lacks details on output format or pagination. It is adequate but not fully complete for an agent to use without additional context.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description adds meaning for addressType, coin, and chain (e.g., ignoring coin/chain for certain addressTypes, using baseCoin). But it does not explain limit and cursor parameters, leaving them undocumented.

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 'Retrieve withdrawal addresses from the address book,' identifying the specific action and resource. It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like queryWithdrawRecords (which retrieves withdrawal history) and queryDepositAddress (deposit addresses).

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 mentions a prerequisite (API key must have withdrawal permissions) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like queryWithdrawRecords. The agent must infer usage context from the name and purpose alone.

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