get_btc_multisig_balance

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds valuable context: derivation from cosigner xpubs, BIP-32 chain walking, gap-limit behavior, and the limitation to P2WSH (Phase 3). No contradictions.

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 that front-load the core purpose and then efficiently detail the derivation method, chain walking, and limitation. Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given the complexity (BIP-32, gap limit, P2WSH limitation, no output schema), the description covers essential behavioral aspects: it communicates what is returned (aggregate + per-address breakdown) and how addresses are derived. Still, the lack of explicit return format or error cases is acceptable for a read-only tool.

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%; description adds meaninful detail beyond schema: walletName is linked to `register_btc_multisig_wallet`, gapLimit explains default 20 with BIP-44 context and cap rationale. The per-address breakdown detail is implied but not specified in 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 opens with 'Watch-only balance read for a registered multi-sig wallet', clearly stating the verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like `get_btc_balance` (single-sig) and `get_btc_multisig_utxos` (UTXOs) by focusing on aggregate balance with per-address breakdown from derived chains.

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 implies usage for quick balance checks ('No device touch') and notes a P2WSH-only limitation, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like `get_btc_multisig_utxos` or `get_btc_balance`. No mention of prerequisites beyond registration or contrast with sibling tools.

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