iota_get_coins

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden. It clarifies that the tool returns a collection of coin objects rather than a balance, but it doesn't disclose return format, pagination, or whether it includes spent coins. Still, 'Get' implies read-only, and the description gives a reasonable behavioral overview.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the core action and object type. No filler or 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 has no annotations and no output schema, so the description is the only source of behavioral context. It covers the main purpose but omits details like return shape, potential errors, or how it differs from balance tools. It's adequate for a straightforward getter but not comprehensive.

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 100%, but the description adds meaning by stating '(IOTA or any token)', clarifying that coinType can filter for any token, not just IOTA. This goes beyond the schema's bare 'Coin type' description.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('all coin objects for an address'), and further clarifies scope with '(IOTA or any token)'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like iota_wallet_balance (which likely returns balances) and iota_objects_by_owner (which returns all objects).

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 provides clear context of use: retrieving all coin objects for a given address, optionally filtered by coin type. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., 'use iota_wallet_balance for aggregated balance'), so it's not fully explicit.

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