mtrkr_wallet_quick_stats

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

The description mentions 'lightweight and fast' as behavioral traits and implies a read-only operation. With no annotations, it carries the full burden, but it omits specifics like authentication needs or error handling. Still, it does not contradict any annotations and adds useful context.

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?

Two concise sentences: first states purpose and output, second provides usage guidance. Every sentence is necessary and front-loaded.

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 tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description covers purpose, output, and usage guidelines. It provides sufficient context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly without additional information.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description only restates 'over a configurable time range' for rangeDays, adding no new meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 the verb 'Get', the resource 'wallet activity summary', and the specific output 'transaction counts (in/out/total)'. It differentiates from siblings by specifying 'use this when you only need counts, not full analytics'.

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?

Explicitly provides when to use ('when you only need counts') and implies when not to use (when full analytics are needed). It also frames the tool as 'lightweight and fast', guiding the agent to select it for quick summaries.

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