Sổ cái ví MONA Cloud

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It communicates a read-only operation and specifies the types of ledger entries involved (deposits, deductions, refunds). However, it does not mention pagination behavior, result ordering, or what happens when ledger data is unavailable.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to stating the operation and the resource, making it easy to scan and understand 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?

The tool has no annotations and no output schema, so the description must cover more ground. It identifies the ledger entry types but omits output expectations, pagination behavior, and differentiation from closely related sibling tools, leaving the agent with an incomplete picture for correct 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description needed to compensate by explaining pagination-related parameters. It does not mention 'limit' or 'cursor' at all. The schema provides basic constraints, but the description adds no semantic value for these parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Đọc' / read) and names the exact resource: ledger lines covering deposits, deductions, and refunds. It is clear about what the tool accesses, though it does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like cloud_balance or monapay_list_transactions.

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 instead of related siblings such as cloud_balance, cloud_usage, or monapay_list_transactions. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or the context in which ledger reading is the appropriate choice.

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