queryWithdrawAddresses

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses substantive behavior: address signature verification filtering, the 24-hour security policy's status semantics, and when coin/chain parameters are ignored. This gives the agent information that annotations alone cannot.

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 and well-structured: a one-line purpose, a permission prerequisite, and a tight bulleted list of business rules. Every sentence adds operational value without redundancy.

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 description covers permissions, filtering behavior, addressType parameter effects, and the baseCoin convention. However, since there is no output schema and no mention of the return format or pagination via cursor, an agent is left with some uncertainty about the response.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains addressType behavior and the role of coin/chain (including baseCoin usage), but it leaves limit and cursor semantics unaddressed, so compensation is only partial.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve withdrawal addresses from the address book.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling operations like queryWithdrawRecords or queryDepositAddress by scoping it to the saved address book.

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?

It states a clear prerequisite (API key must have withdrawal permissions) and contextual business rules such as addressType ignoring coin/chain. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or when-not conditions, but the use case is clearly implied by the address-book scope.

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