Get Wallet by ID

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

Annotations already cover key behavioral traits (read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world), so the description doesn't need to repeat these. It adds value by specifying 'public profile,' which hints at limited data access, but doesn't elaborate on rate limits, authentication needs, or error conditions. No contradiction with annotations.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 simple single parameter, high schema coverage, and comprehensive annotations, the description is adequate for a basic read operation. However, without an output schema, it doesn't clarify what 'public profile' includes or the response format, leaving some gaps for an agent to infer.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with 'wallet_id' clearly documented. The description doesn't add any extra parameter details beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without enhancing semantics.

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 action ('Retrieve') and resource ('wallet's public profile'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar sibling tools like 'dual_get_object' or 'dual_get_me', which also retrieve data, so it doesn't reach the highest score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools like 'dual_get_object' or 'dual_get_organization' that might retrieve related data, there's no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions to help an agent choose appropriately.

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