get_tenant_balance

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully states that the data is live and that the response contains balance and ledger data. It does not mention permissions, error behavior, or what exactly 'ledger data' includes, which prevents a higher score.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every phrase adds value: the operation, the resource, the live-data nature, and the expected return content.

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 simple one-parameter read tool, this is nearly complete: the required input is clear and the return payload is summarized. It would be fully complete if it specified the format or scope of 'ledger data,' especially since no output schema is provided.

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 single parameter tenant_name is already fully described in the schema, so schema description coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no further parameter-level meaning, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 names the verb and resource: it gets a tenant's current ledger balance from Rentvine. It is unambiguous next to siblings like list_tenants and search_transactions, but it never explicitly differentiates itself from those alternatives, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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 wording implies this is the correct tool when a tenant's current live balance is needed, and no sibling appears to offer the same balance-specific operation. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it name alternatives such as list_tenants or search_transactions.

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