Wallet and identity

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

Adds context beyond annotations: 'Read-only: queries the chain, never signs' reinforces readOnlyHint and clarifies no transaction signing occurs. 'The key is created on first run in the data dir' is important side-effect/lifecycle info not in annotations, and the pointer to export_backup is useful. Could have said more about chain latency or rate limits, but this is solid.

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?

Front-loads the main purpose and usage. However, the second sentence contains a grammatical error ('where the network has USDC its EVM address') that hurts readability, and the key-creation detail is buried at the end. Still reasonably compact.

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 zero-param read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned, when to call it, safety, and first-run key behavior. One awkward sentence reduces polish, but an agent has enough to invoke correctly.

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?

No parameters, so baseline is 4. The description complements by specifying exactly what identity/balances are returned, which is valuable since there is no output 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?

Specific verb+resources: shows identity (Nostr pubkey), BTC signet address and balance, and EVM address with USDC/ETH balances. Distinguishes itself from siblings like network_info and export_backup through concrete output contents. Slightly impeded by an awkward grammatical slip ('where the network has USDC its EVM address').

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?

Explicit when-to-use: 'Use it before fund_order to check that the wallet can pay the quote, and to get the address to fund'. Names the alternative funding paths (signet faucet; on the lab: lab_faucet). Routes the agent clearly.

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