wise_get_balance

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates it's a safe read operation. The description adds value by specifying the returned fields (available amount, reserved amount, last updated), providing context beyond the annotation. No contradictions with annotations.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and resource. Every word is meaningful, with no unnecessary repetition 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 simple retrieval tool with only two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool does and what it returns. However, it could mention that the return is a single balance object or that it includes more fields than listed (due to openWorldHint).

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 has 100% description coverage, with clear descriptions for both parameters (balanceId, profileId). The tool description does not add additional semantic information beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'get', the resource 'specific balance by ID', and lists key fields returned (available amount, reserved amount, last updated). It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'wise_list_balances' which lists all balances, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 that this tool is for retrieving a single balance when its ID is known, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like 'wise_list_balances' or provide any exclusions or prerequisites. This leaves room for ambiguity.

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