wapupay_spending_limit

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states it 'gets' the limit, implying a read-only operation, but fails to mention response format, potential errors, or whether authentication is needed. Basic functionality is clear, but no deeper transparency is provided.

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?

Single sentence, no redundancy, front-loaded with key information. Every word earns its place.

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 simple parameterless query, the description sufficiently conveys purpose and output. However, lacking an output schema, it could explicitly mention that the return value is a numeric amount. Overall, it's complete enough for a tool of this complexity.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter details because none exist. According to the rubric, 0 parameters nets a baseline of 4, which is appropriate here.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves a monthly spending limit in USDT based on KYC tier for a WapuPay account/key. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('spending limit'), and is distinct from sibling tools like wapupay_create_order or wapupay_quote.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use, prerequisites, or compare with sibling tools like wapupay_transactions or wapupay_orders. An AI agent has insufficient context to select it appropriately.

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