subscribeWallet

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

Annotations already signal readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. It adds the UTA wallet and real-time aspects, but does not disclose important behavior such as how the subscription terminates, whether the call blocks, or how timeoutMs and messageCount affect delivery.

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 sentence that front-loads the core action and resource. There is no filler or redundant information.

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?

For a subscription tool with no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits return behavior, subscription duration/termination semantics, and enough parameter context, leaving an agent to guess at call expectations.

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%, and the description does not explain timeoutMs or messageCount at all. An agent must infer their meaning purely from property names and constraints, which is a notable gap for correct invocation.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Subscribe to real-time wallet updates for the Unified Trading Account (UTA).' It is distinct from siblings like getWalletBalance or other subscription tools by naming wallet updates and the UTA scope.

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 implies when to use it: whenever real-time UTA wallet updates are needed. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives such as getWalletBalance for one-time balance queries or other subscription endpoints, so exclusion guidance is missing.

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