list_wallet_txns

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It conveys that the tool reads a list, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, filtering semantics, or whether walletable_id/walletable_type are required to scope the query.

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 concise sentence with no redundant wording, but it is too under-specified to be considered well-structured for a 7-parameter tool. It is short rather than appropriately sized.

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 tool with no output schema, no annotations, low schema coverage, and many sibling list tools, one phrase '明細一覧を取得' is severely incomplete. It lacks return-value context, parameter guidance, and alternatives.

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 description coverage is only 14% (only company_id has a description), and the description itself adds no parameter meaning. With 7 parameters and no schema/description coverage, an agent cannot infer the purpose of limit, offset, start_date, end_date, walletable_id, or walletable_type from the text.

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 states a list-retrieval operation (明細...一覧を取得) that aligns with the tool name list_wallet_txns, so an agent can infer it returns wallet transaction details. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings such as list_transfers or list_deals, but the verb and resource are clear.

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?

There is no guidance on when to choose this tool over list_walletables, list_transfers, or list_deals, and no mention of required filters like company_id or walletable_type. Usage context is only implied by the word 'list'.

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