get_wallet_details

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

The description implies a read-only operation ('retrieves details'), which matches the tool's purpose. Since no annotations exist, the description carries the full burden, but it provides no additional behavioral context such as permissions needed or side effects. This is adequate for a simple read tool.

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?

The description is a single sentence with no fluff. It could be more informative, but it is concise 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?

With no output schema, the description should give some indication of what 'details' includes (e.g., balance, address, name). It fails to do so, leaving the agent uncertain about the return value.

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 coverage is 100%, and both the schema and description describe the walletId parameter similarly. The description adds no new meaning beyond 'by its ID', so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool retrieves details for a specific wallet by ID. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like get_wallet_balance or get_wallet_transactions, which also target specific wallets.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, there is no mention that get_wallets should be used first to obtain the ID, or that other tools exist for specific wallet data.

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