portfolio

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It adds useful context by disclosing the cost ($0.02 USDC via x402) and the returned data type, but it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe potential failure modes, rate limits, or authorization requirements.

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 extremely concise, front-loading the core purpose and then adding the critical cost detail in a second short sentence. Every word earns its place; there is no 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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description provides the essential details: chain, asset classes, USD valuation, and cost. It is nearly complete, though a brief note on read-only behavior would fully cover the no-annotations context.

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 already documents the single parameter 'address' as 'Wallet address on Base' with 100% coverage. The description reinforces that it is a Base address, but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, matching the baseline for high schema 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 that the tool returns ETH and ERC-20 balances for a Base address with USD values. It is precise about the resource and scope, though it lacks an explicit imperative verb such as 'Gets' or 'Retrieves.' It is distinguishable from siblings like token_info by focusing on the full portfolio balance.

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?

No explicit or implicit guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as token_info or swap_quote. There is no mention of scenarios, exclusions, or contextual conditions that would help an agent decide between this and sibling tools.

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