get_all_balances

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only indicates a read operation. Missing details on pagination, error handling (invalid address), rate limits, or response format. The agent is left unaware of potential side effects or limitations.

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?

Single sentence is concise and front-loaded with key information. However, for a tool with only one parameter, it could include more structure (e.g., bullet points) without losing brevity.

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?

Despite low complexity, the description omits details about the response structure (e.g., mapping of coin types to balances). With no output schema, the agent cannot anticipate return format. Also lacks context on when results might be incomplete or paginated.

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?

Input schema already has 100% coverage with a description for 'address'. The tool description does not add new semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 applies as schema handles parameter documentation.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves all coin balances for an address, including SUI and other coin types. This differentiates it from siblings like get_balance (likely for a specific coin) and get_coins (which lists coin objects).

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_balance for a specific coin). The description implies scope but does not state conditions or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from sibling names.

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