get_business_account_star_balance

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description is consistent. However, it adds no additional behavioral context beyond a simple read, such as rate limits, authorization requirements, or that the balance may change due to external transactions. The description adds minimal context beyond what annotations provide.

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, direct sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

While the tool is simple and annotations cover safety, the description lacks argument guidance (business_connection_id) and return-value details. Given there is no output schema, this leaves the agent without a complete picture of how to invoke the tool or interpret results. It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 has one parameter (business_connection_id) with 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain what this ID is or how to acquire it. Since schema coverage is low, the description should compensate by describing the parameter, but it does not, leaving the agent to infer meaning from the parameter name alone.

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 ('Get') and resource ('Telegram Stars balance of a business account'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_my_star_balance or get_business_account_gifts. It states exactly what the tool retrieves.

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 phrase 'of a business account' implies this tool is for business account balances rather than personal (get_my_star_balance), but no explicit when-to-use or alternative references are provided. It relies on the user to infer context from the name.

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