Robinhood Chain wallet snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is paid (cost up to $0.01 USDC) and explains the optional 'deep' parameter for token holdings. It does not describe rate limits or error behavior, but the read-only nature is implied.

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 two sentences long, with the first sentence conveying the core functionality and the second addressing cost. Every word adds value; no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description provides a detailed list of return data (ETH balance, USD, tx count, account type, flags). This sufficiently informs the agent of the tool's output. Minor gaps like pagination or error conditions are acceptable for a snapshot tool.

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%, with both 'address' and 'deep' documented. The description adds value by explaining 'deep=true' for token holdings, reinforcing the schema. This is adequate but does not go beyond what the schema already conveys.

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 identifies the tool as providing a wallet snapshot on Robinhood Chain, listing specific data points (ETH balance, USD, tx count, account type, scam/reputation flags, and optional token holdings). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'rhchain_wallet_score' and 'wallet_risk' by focusing on basic snapshot info.

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 the tool is paid with a cost cap, which helps set expectations, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'wallet_risk' or 'rhchain_wallet_score'. It lacks a clear 'when-to-use' or 'when-not-to-use' context.

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