bridge_create_wallet

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It clearly indicates a write operation ('Create'), but does not mention potential side effects, requirements like existing customer, idempotency behavior, or what is returned. The description is too minimal to inform the agent of important behavioral implications.

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, compact sentence that immediately states the action and key context. There is no redundancy or filler, and it is appropriately front-loaded with the verb and object.

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?

Given the moderate complexity (3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the core action but omits useful context such as required customer existence, whether the operation is idempotent by default, or what a successful response looks like. It is adequate for a basic create operation but leaves notable gaps.

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%, so the schema fully documents all three parameters. The description does not add any new meaning beyond what is in the schema, such as how idempotency_key works or the implications of choosing a specific chain. It earns the baseline score of 3 for a well-covered 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 uses the specific verb 'Create' with a clear resource ('custodial wallet') and specifies the context ('for a customer on a specific blockchain'). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like create_virtual_account or get_wallet by naming the wallet creation action and its custodial nature.

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 the tool is used when a wallet needs to be created for a customer on a blockchain, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives such as create_virtual_account or list_wallets. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tools.

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