get_blockfrost_balances

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it mentions 'via Blockfrost' indicating an external API dependency, it fails to disclose critical behaviors such as rate limiting, authentication requirements, error handling, or what the return structure contains.

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, efficient sentence with no redundant words. It is appropriately front-loaded with the verb and immediately identifies the resource and method.

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 single-parameter tool, the description covers the basic invocation requirements. However, given the lack of output schema and annotations, it could be improved by describing the expected return value (e.g., 'returns a list of assets including ADA and native tokens').

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 100% description coverage ('Cardano bech32 address'), so the schema adequately documents the parameter. The description adds no additional semantic context beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation for well-documented schemas.

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 clearly states the action ('Get'), resource ('token balances'), and scope ('for a Cardano address via Blockfrost'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_assets' or clarify whether this retrieves all native assets or just ADA, preventing a perfect score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the numerous sibling 'get' tools (get_assets, get_cdps_by_address, etc.), it fails to specify that this is for general blockchain balances versus protocol-specific positions.

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