get_fiat_balance

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

With no annotations, the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as return format, authentication needs, or side effects. The word 'Get' implies a read operation, but no additional context (e.g., pagination, rate limits) is given.

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 very short, but the structure with an Args list is clear. However, conciseness comes at the cost of missing critical information (e.g., return type). Every sentence earns its place, but there should be more.

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?

Given no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., a list of balances, a single number). It also does not differentiate from related siblings like get_coin_balance or get_fiat_coin_list, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 description's 'Args' section clarifies that 'currency' is an optional filter, which adds value beyond the schema's minimal 'Currency' title. However, it does not specify acceptable values (e.g., ISO codes) or behavior when omitted.

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 'Get fiat balance' is a near-tautology of the tool name, adding no specificity beyond the name. It fails to describe the scope or meaning of 'fiat balance' (e.g., total fiat across all currencies? per-currency?).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_account_balance or get_all_coins_balance. The optional currency filter implies usage for a specific currency, but this is not explicitly stated.

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