get_wallet_transactions

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains parameter roles (date filtering, pagination) but omits details like ordering, error handling, or what happens when from_date > to_date. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

Concise docstring format with clear sections (Args, Returns). Front-loaded with purpose sentence. No fluff, every sentence adds value.

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 optional filtering and pagination, the description covers key input details and return type. Absence of output schema is noted but context says output schema exists, so return description is sufficient. Could mention sorting or limits.

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 0%, but description adds meaningful explanations for each parameter (e.g., ISO format for dates, pagination defaults). Compensates well for lack of schema descriptions, though could specify date format more precisely.

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 'Get wallet transaction history with optional filtering', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes well from sibling tools like charge-related ones, as wallet transactions are a distinct domain.

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 explicit when-to-use or alternatives provided. The description implies usage for retrieving transaction history with optional filters, but lacks guidance on when to prefer this over other tools or pagination scenarios.

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