razz-mcp

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

No annotations provided, yet description fully discloses: persistent primary wallet designation ('First wallet linked becomes your primary'), security model (withdrawal restrictions), deposit monitoring mechanics ('polls every 15s'), and memo requirements (unlinked wallets require memo, linked do not).

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-loaded core purpose followed by structured sections (HOW DEPOSITS WORK, WHY LINK). Uses numbered list for workflow clarity. Every sentence provides actionable context about security, mechanics, or prerequisites with no redundancy.

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 critical financial/security tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description comprehensively covers: prerequisites, side effects (primary wallet), ecosystem integration (deposit monitor), security implications, and restrictions. No gaps remain for safe invocation.

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 has 100% description coverage (walletAddress format specified). Description mentions linking a wallet but does not add parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema documentation is complete.

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?

Opens with specific verb ('Link') and resource ('Solana wallet'), explicitly states it's 'Required for deposits and withdrawals,' and distinguishes from siblings by detailing the specific workflow with request_deposit and contrasting with unlinked wallet restrictions.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use ('Required for deposits and withdrawals'), workflow integration ('Call request_deposit to get...'), and clear restrictions ('Withdrawals are restricted to linked wallets only'). Names sibling tool request_deposit explicitly and explains first-wallet-becomes-primary behavior.

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