Configure Yolfi Settlement Wallets

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

Annotations indicate non-readOnly, non-destructive, non-idempotent, and open-world. The description adds that it configures wallets and forbids inventing addresses. It does not elaborate on side effects, reversibility, or return behavior, which would enhance 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 very concise: two sentences front-loaded with purpose. It includes a crucial constraint without unnecessary detail. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and a key rule. However, it does not mention what happens on success or failure, or if there are prerequisites beyond user input (e.g., authentication via yolfi_auth_status).

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 input schema already provides a description for the parameter 'settlementAccounts' with example fields. The description's mention of wallet addresses, networks, and enabled tokens echoes this but does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3.

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 'Configure' and the resource 'settlement wallets', and specifies that it should be used after the user provides wallet addresses, networks, and enabled tokens. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like yolfi_organization_update which is more general.

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 provides some usage guidance by stating 'after the user provides wallet addresses, networks, and enabled tokens' and the rule 'Never invent wallet addresses.' However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or compare it to alternatives among siblings.

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