get_balances

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose side effects, authentication, or rate limiting. It only lists token types. There is no mention that this is a read-only, safe operation, or what the response contains beyond a hint of token names. This leaves the agent uncertain about behavior.

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, compact sentence that conveys essential information without wasted words. It front-loads the purpose ('Wallet balances') and specifies the token types efficiently.

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 partially explains return values by naming token types, but it does not indicate the format (e.g., amounts, list) or explicitly state that balances belong to the authenticated user. For a parameterless tool, this leaves some ambiguity, but the core information is present.

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 no parameters, so the description does not need to explain them. The baseline for empty params is 4. The description adds value by listing the specific token types returned, which helps set expectations beyond the schema.

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 tool returns wallet balances for specific token types (USDB, STASIS, wSTASIS, factory tokens). The verb and resource are implied by the name, making the purpose understandable. However, it does not specify whose wallet (presumably the user's), which is a minor ambiguity.

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 over alternative get tools (e.g., get_my_tokens, get_my_stats). There are many sibling tools with similar purposes, and the description does not differentiate use cases or state prerequisites.

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