List your seller wallet movements

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral value with the 'newest first' ordering and the composition of movement types, but says nothing about pagination behavior or what a page of results looks like beyond the schema's limit/offset.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the usage trigger, then the resource and its scope. No filler and nothing redundant with the schema or annotations.

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?

For a simple read-only list tool with full schema coverage and rich annotations, the description covers what is listed, in what order, and when to use it. With no output schema, a brief note on pagination/total counts would make it complete, but nothing critical is missing.

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% with two optional, fully documented pagination parameters, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no information about limit/offset semantics beyond what the schema already states.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('lists ... movements of their seller wallet') and enumerates what those movements are (earnings from orders, withdrawals, manual corrections) plus sort order, which an agent can distinguish from the balance-oriented get_seller_wallet. It stops short of explicitly naming the sibling it is not, so 4 rather than 5.

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?

'Use this when the user asks about the movements of their seller wallet' gives a clear triggering condition. No exclusions or alternatives are named, so the agent must infer that get_seller_wallet handles balances and list_withdrawals handles withdrawals alone.

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