Get Funding Tree

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

The description adds information beyond annotations: requires an API key, and specifies the depth and type of interactions (bridges/DEXs). This complements the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations effectively.

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 sentences pack essential purpose, scope, and requirements with zero redundancy. Every word serves a purpose, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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 an output schema, return value details are unnecessary. The description covers purpose, depth, and authentication. An example or note on expected output structure would further enhance completeness.

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?

Parameter coverage is 100% via schema, and the description provides context for the address's role in tracing funds. However, no additional constraints or format details are added beyond the schema.

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 it traces funding sources for a wallet, specifying 2-level depth and bridge/DEX interactions. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get-wallet-transactions or get-tx-trace, which serve different purposes.

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 a prerequisite (API key) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given 26 sibling tools, comparative guidance would improve selection accuracy.

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