ramzinex_get_addresses

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It states the tool is read-only, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not detail error handling or edge cases, leaving some behavioral aspects uncovered.

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 includes a Persian language note and API endpoint mapping, which may be extraneous. While fairly concise, some content could be trimmed without losing clarity.

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?

With an output schema present, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers purpose, parameters, prerequisites, and hints for related tools, providing sufficient context for effective usage.

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%, so the description compensates by explaining the 'networks' parameter as a non-empty list and directing to ramzinex_get_networks for discovery. It also clarifies the 'instance' parameter's default behavior, adding value beyond the schema.

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 'Get my wallet addresses for the given networks (read-only)', specifying the verb (get), resource (wallet addresses), and scope (for given networks). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ramzinex_get_networks or ramzinex_get_available_balance.

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 required credentials and suggests discovering networks via ramzinex_get_networks. It implicitly indicates usage for querying addresses but does not explicitly exclude scenarios or provide alternatives.

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