apiosk_create_wallet_connect_string

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

The annotations provide little behavioral signal since all hints are false. The description adds that the tool returns a new connect string and uses the word 'rotate,' which suggests existing tokens may be replaced, but it does not disclose whether revoke_existing invalidates current connect strings or what happens to previously issued tokens.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the core action, and no filler. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a tool with four parameters, one required parameter, and subtle behaviors around rotation and revocation, the description is too thin. It omits the effect of revoke_existing, the conditions under which private_key is needed, and any prerequisites about the managed wallet. The output schema helps, but the behavioral context is still incomplete.

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 only 25%: only private_key has an explanation. The description does not clarify wallet_id, token_name, or revoke_existing beyond their names, and it only weakly implies that revoke_existing relates to rotation. It does not compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 names a specific action ('Rotate or create a connect token') and a specific resource ('managed wallet'), and states the output ('return the new connect string'). This clearly differentiates it from the generic wallet create/update/delete siblings.

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 usage context is implied: use this tool when you need to rotate or create a wallet connect string. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this over related siblings such as apiosk_wallet_create, apiosk_wallet_update, or apiosk_wallet_save_secret.

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