Get wallet balance

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states 'Does not spend,' signaling a non-destructive read, and notes the API key requirement. However, it does not disclose any other behaviors like response format, rate limits, or potential side effects beyond the minimal non-spending note.

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?

Three short sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, and each sentence adds necessary information: action, prerequisite, and safety. It is an exemplary model of conciseness.

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 read with no parameters, the description covers the essential context: what it does, the API key prerequisite, and that it is non-destructive. It does not specify the return value format, but for a balance check, an agent can reasonably infer the outcome. The absence of an output schema makes this slightly less complete, but the description remains adequate.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the description has no need to explain them. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description correctly focuses on the authentication requirement, which is a behavioral prerequisite rather than a parameter.

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 specific verb ('Get'), a clear resource ('wallet balance'), and adds 'current' to clarify scope. It is distinct from all sibling tools, none of which deal with balances, so an agent can immediately recognize its purpose.

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 mentions the API key requirement, which is a prerequisite, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives. Since no sibling covers balances, it is implicitly clear, but there is no explicit usage context or exclusion.

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