wallet_generate_recovery_secret

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and delivers meaningful context: it is one-time, exactly 32 bytes, must be persisted in the agent secret manager, and is never transmitted to Voidly. It does not clarify whether a second call invalidates a prior secret, nor what the return value looks like, leaving a small gap for a security-sensitive operation.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and its key constraint (one-time, 32-byte) followed by the mandatory storage step. Every clause earns its place with no 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?

For a zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool with no annotations, the description covers purpose, ordering relative to wallet_create, storage requirement, and the key privacy guarantee. The only omission is lifecycle edge cases (repeat invocation, errors), which is minor given the tool's simplicity.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema baseline is 4. There is nothing further for the description to disambiguate, and it introduces no misleading parameter-like instructions.

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 ('Generate a one-time 32-byte recovery secret') with concrete size and lifecycle detail. It also implicitly distinguishes itself from siblings by tying its use to the moment 'before creating a wallet', which no other sibling claims.

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?

Gives clear sequencing guidance ('Store it in the agent secret manager before creating a wallet'), which tells the agent when in the flow to call it. It stops short of naming alternatives or stating when-not to call it (e.g. whether it can be re-run), so it falls just below explicit when/when-not coverage.

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