Дочерние аккаунты с балансами

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it returns {balance, bonusBalance} in rubles and bonus rubles, and scopes to child accounts only. This goes beyond annotations without contradicting them.

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 in Russian, front-loaded with the core purpose, then usage guidance, and a clarifying note. No redundant words or repetition of schema/annotations.

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?

With no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what is returned (balance fields), when to use it, and what it does not include (parent balance). An agent has all necessary information to call it correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so schema description coverage is 100% (vacuous). Baseline for 0 params is 4; the description adds no parameter details because none are needed. Nothing is missing.

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 explicitly states it is the same list as list_child_accounts plus balances for each child account, and clarifies it shows only child balances, differentiating it from get_balance. The verb 'list' and resource are clearly defined.

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?

It provides explicit context for when to use this tool: before transfer_funds/transfer_bonus to check balances and verify transfers. It also tells the agent that parent balance should be fetched with get_balance, giving an exclusion.

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