B3TR: User overview (totals)

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds the API endpoint and the mutual exclusivity constraint, which are useful behavioral details beyond the annotations. It does not contradict the 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 concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence provides necessary information 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 presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description doesn't need to detail return values. It covers the key inputs and their constraints. However, it could briefly mention that the tool is for a single wallet and provides aggregate totals, which it does.

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 for all three parameters. The description adds value by explaining the mutual exclusivity between 'date' and 'roundId', and clarifying the date format (yyyy-MM-dd UTC). This goes beyond what the schema provides.

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 gets the B3TR action overview for a specific wallet, listing specific return fields (total rewards, rewarded actions, sustainability impact, rankings, X-App interactions). It also provides the API endpoint, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like getB3TRActionsForUser or getB3TRUserAppOverview by specifying the aggregate nature of the response.

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 mentions the optional filters (roundId and date) and states they are mutually exclusive, which guides correct usage. However, it does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like getB3TRUserAppOverview or getB3TRUserDailySummaries.

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