Stripe balance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes what the tool returns (available and pending balance per currency) but does not state whether it is read-only, whether authentication is required, rate limits, or any other behavioral traits. This is a significant gap for a tool that likely performs a read operation.

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?

A single sentence delivers essential information efficiently, with the core resource (balance) and key distinction (platform vs. connected account) front-loaded. There is no redundancy or extraneous detail.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description covers the essential input semantics and output content. It does not mention auth or rate limits, but those are likely not necessary for a basic read-only balance query.

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 only provides a pattern for account_id, but the description clarifies its meaning: omitting it queries the platform account, while including it queries a connected account. This adds meaningful semantic detail and partially compensates for 0% schema description coverage.

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 resource (available and pending balance per currency) and scope (platform vs. connected account), making it easy to distinguish from siblings like list_accounts or get_account. However, it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, so it falls just short of full differentiation.

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 implies when to use the tool (for balance queries) and explains the account_id distinction (no account_id for platform, provide account_id for connected account). It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, leaving usage guidance largely implicit.

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