get_account_balance

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context by specifying the historical block scope and native TRX asset. It does not contradict annotations, though it omits details like the requirement for both blockHash and blockNumber.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with no irrelevant information or redundancy.

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 simple, read-only nature, the schema covers parameters, and annotations cover safety; the description is sufficient for selection. The absence of an output schema and lack of guidance on the dual block identifiers are minor gaps, but overall the description is complete enough for a low-complexity tool.

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 provides full descriptions for all four parameters (100% coverage), so the description does not need to add much. It adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, which is acceptable per the baseline.

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 'Get account TRX balance at a specific block height' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_balance and get_token_balance by focusing on TRX and a specific block height.

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 (when a historical TRX balance at a given block height is needed) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives such as get_balance for current balances. It provides clear context but lacks exclusions or alternative tool references.

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