wallet_balance

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. It only states that the tool 'Show[s] USDC balance' and does not mention whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires any network access, or what happens if the address is invalid. The read-only nature is implied by 'Show' but not explicitly stated, and no other behavioral traits are disclosed.

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, short sentence (15 words) that is front-loaded with the action ('Show') and resource ('USDC balance'). Every word contributes meaning with no redundancy 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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately conveys the main function and return value (a USDC balance). It lacks any note on edge cases or response formatting, but these are not critical for such a straightforward operation.

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 already fully documents the optional parameter 'address' with a clear description. The tool description adds a hint about the '--address' flag but does not provide additional semantics beyond what the schema offers. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema coverage is 100%.

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 uses a specific verb ('Show') and clearly identifies the resource ('USDC balance') and the target ('local worker wallet', with an optional address override). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like wallet_address (which likely returns the address) and task_* tools.

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 clearly establishes the context for using this tool: to display the USDC balance of the local wallet or a specific address. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but the purpose is unambiguous and no exclusions are needed given the simplicity and sibling separation.

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