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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Показывает' conveys a read-only, non-destructive query. It adds the practical caveat about checking before large batches, which is valuable behavioral context beyond the literal reading. Lacks explicit statements about permissions or exact return format, but for a simple balance check the risk is low.

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 concise sentences. The first states the core function and the second provides a practical usage hint. There is no redundancy or filler.

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 parameterless read-only query with no output schema, the description sufficiently conveys what the agent needs to know: it returns the remaining balance in minutes and suggests when to call it. It does not explicitly describe the return payload, but the meaning is clear enough for this simple tool.

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?

This tool takes zero parameters, so the schema covers everything. The description does not need to elaborate on inputs; the baseline of 4 for a no-parameter tool is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the tool shows the remaining transcription minutes on balance ('Показывает, сколько минут расшифровки осталось на балансе'), a specific verb and resource. It is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like get_transcript or transcribe_file.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to call it: before a batch of long recordings to avoid hitting the limit mid-process. It does not name alternatives explicitly, but sibling contexts make it clear this is the balance query.

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