set_demo_wallet

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

The description fully discloses behavioral traits: it upgrades demo mode from default to live, affects tools like prepare_* and send_transaction, describes per-cell replacement semantics, and clarifies that empty args clear the wallet. No contradictions with annotations (idempotentHint=true matches replace behavior).

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 dense and well-structured with numbered lists for input shapes. It is slightly verbose but every sentence adds value. Front-loading the core purpose helps.

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 tool's complexity (three input shapes, demo mode behavior, side effects on other tools), the description is remarkably complete. It covers edge cases (null cells, no-op outside demo mode), clearing wallet, and the impact on other tool groups. No output schema is needed as behavior is fully described.

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 the description adds significant value beyond schema: mutual exclusivity of parameter groups, examples for each shape, explanation of per-cell vs batch loading, and clarification of null cells. This fully compensates for the lack of an 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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: switching the active demo wallet via three input shapes. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_demo_wallet' and 'exit_demo_mode' by specifying its unique role in demo mode configuration.

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 explicitly limits usage to demo mode, explains the three input shapes with examples, and notes that calling outside demo mode returns a no-op. It could be enhanced by explicitly mentioning when to prefer alternatives like 'exit_demo_mode', but the context is clear.

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