Перевод между счетами

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only flags 'ДЕНЕЖНАЯ ОПЕРАЦИЯ' (monetary operation) and states transfers occur, but fails to disclose irreversibility, confirmation requirements, fees, or side effects. For a money-moving tool, this is a significant omission.

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 brief and front-loaded with the monetary operation warning, making it efficient. However, it may be too terse, omitting critical behavioral context that an agent would need.

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 financial operation with four required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It lacks details about the result format, possible errors, or whether a confirmation step exists, leaving agents under-informed.

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 schema already provides descriptive comments for all four parameters (amount, currency, fromAccountId, toAccountId), achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so it does not enhance parameter understanding.

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's function: transferring funds between wallet accounts. It uses a specific verb ('переводит') and resource ('счета кошелька'), avoiding tautology. While it doesn't explicitly name sibling tools, the phrase 'between wallet accounts' distinguishes it from external transfers or withdrawals.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like withdrawal or autosettlement tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as checking balances via wata_wallet_balances, or any conditions that should be met before calling this tool.

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