get_wallet_transactions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It states that a valid session token is required (a behavioral constraint) but does not disclose what happens with invalid tokens, rate limits, side effects, or data scope (e.g., only recent transactions). Minimal transparency.

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, clear sentence with no filler. It is appropriately short but could be improved by adding a bit more context without sacrificing conciseness.

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 3 well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete—it omits details like the structure of returned transactions, ordering, or filtering capabilities beyond pagination. Lacks full context for an agent to infer usage nuances.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds 'paginated', which aligns with page/limit parameters but does not provide additional meaning beyond what the schema already covers (e.g., defaults, formats).

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 verb 'Retrieves' and the resource 'paginated list of wallet transaction history'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like get_wallet_balance (balance) and get_user_orders (orders), making the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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 only mentions that a valid session token is required but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_wallet_balance or get_user_orders. No context on prerequisites or exclusions.

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