get-account

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the domain (Binance USDⓈ-M Futures) and what is returned, but omits behavioral traits like authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether it's a read-only call. With zero annotations, a 3 is appropriate for partial disclosure of context.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and then the value proposition. No wasted words, though it could be slightly more structured with explicit when-to-use guidance.

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 no-param, no-annotation tool, the description covers what it returns and why it's useful. However, given the complexity of a futures trading API, it lacks critical operational details like authentication needs, rate limits, or error behavior that an agent might need to invoke it correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information, which is correct since there are none.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (current account information) plus the exact scope (balances, margin, positions) for Binance USDⓈ-M Futures. Clearly distinguishes from siblings like get-position, which returns only positions.

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?

Implies usage for risk management and portfolio tracking, which gives context for when to call it. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use it versus get-position or get-open-orders, or any exclusions.

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