get_invited_wallets_by_token

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states authentication is required but says nothing about what specific permissions are needed, whether the operation is read-only or destructive, rate limits, pagination, or what happens if chain/token combo is invalid. The statement is minimal.

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?

At two sentences, the description is efficient and front-loaded with the key action. However, the second sentence about authentication could be integrated or expanded slightly for clarity without losing conciseness.

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 presence of sibling tools like 'get_invited_wallets', a description of the difference is missing. The tool is moderately complex with two required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations; the description is too brief to cover what happens on success/failure or edge cases.

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 descriptions for both parameters (chain_id: 'Blockchain chain ID', token_id: 'Token ID'), so baseline is 3. The description does not add additional semantics beyond the schema, such as expected format (hex? decimal?), supported chains, or token standard.

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 invited wallet addresses for a specific chain and token', specifying the verb (get), resource (invited wallet addresses), and the scoping criteria (chain and token). This distinguishes it from the sibling 'get_invited_wallets' which likely does not filter by token.

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 'System-level operation requiring authentication' but provides no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like 'get_invited_wallets' (which may not filter by token) or other wallet-related tools. No exclusions or context-specific advice is given.

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