iota_wallet_address

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior, but it only states 'Get', which implies a read operation without explicitly confirming no side effects. It also provides no details about the return value, format, or prerequisites (e.g., wallet initialization), leaving significant behavioral transparency gaps.

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 is front-loaded with the essential information. Every word contributes to the purpose, with no filler or unnecessary detail.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, this description provides the core information needed to understand what the tool does. While it could mention the return format or any caveats, the simplicity of the tool makes this description reasonably complete for an agent.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema coverage is trivially 100%. Per the rubric, a zero-parameter tool gets a baseline score of 4 since the description does not need to explain parameter semantics.

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 ('current IOTA Agent Wallet address'), clearly indicating the tool's function. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like iota_wallet_accounts, which might also relate to 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?

No guidance is provided regarding when to use this tool instead of alternatives. An agent receives no context about whether this is the preferred tool for retrieving an address versus iota_wallet_accounts or other wallet-related tools.

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