wb_advert_balance

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It indicates the returned aspects (account, balance, bonuses) and implies a read-only lookup, but it does not explicitly state that it is a read operation or mention auth or response format constraints.

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 one short line and front-loads the resource and its fields. Minor redundancy ('balance' appears twice) and the parenthetical Russian translation add little but do not hurt.

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 zero-parameter read tool, the description names the main return components, which is adequate at a minimum level. However, with no output schema and no mention of currency/format or relationship to finance_balance, an agent still has some ambiguity about exactly what response to expect.

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 is empty, so the 0-parameter baseline of 4 applies. There are no parameter semantics to clarify.

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 identifies the resource as the ad account and lists the data included (account, balance, bonuses), making the tool's purpose clear. It lacks an explicit verb such as 'retrieve' or 'get', and it does not differentiate from wb_finance_balance or wb_advert_budget, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance about when to select this tool over sibling alternatives such as wb_finance_balance, wb_advert_budget, or wb_advert_payments. Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name.

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