get_balances

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. The word 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly confirm no side effects, nor does it mention defaults for unspecified parameters or return format. This is adequate but minimal.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action and scope. It contains zero filler and is highly efficient.

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 two-parameter query tool, the description covers the core intent. However, it lacks a note on return format (e.g., whether both HBAR and HTS tokens are included) and does not differentiate from the similar-sounding 'get_escrow_balances'. These are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both 'tokenId' and 'accountId'. The description adds little beyond the schema—'all tokens or a specific token' maps to tokenId but provides no syntax or format details. Baseline 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 tool's purpose: 'Get Hedera account balances for all tokens or a specific token.' The verb 'Get' and resource 'Hedera account balances' are specific, and the scope is unambiguous. It also implicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tool 'get_escrow_balances' by focusing on account balances.

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 usage: use this tool to query account balances. However, it does not explicitly provide when-not-to-use guidance or mention alternatives such as 'get_escrow_balances'. Since sibling tools exist and are not referenced, the guidance is limited.

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