cap_account_demo_topup

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the SDK enforces demo account context and confirms the transaction, adding behavioral insight beyond the schema. However, it omits details like mutability, idempotency, or success indications.

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 concise sentences with no redundant information. Front-loads core purpose and constraints 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?

The tool is simple with two parameters and an output schema. The description covers purpose and key enforcement, but lacks details on preconditions (e.g., login required), effects on balance, or output schema contents. It is minimally adequate for a basic operation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It implies 'amount' is the top-up amount and 'confirm' is enforced, but does not explain the confirm parameter's role (e.g., whether it's a boolean flag). The description adds minimal meaning beyond field names.

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 uses specific verb 'top up' and resource 'demo account balance', clearly stating the tool's function. The 'DEMO ONLY' qualifier distinguishes it from live account operations, aligning with sibling tools focused on account management.

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 implies use only for demo accounts via 'DEMO ONLY', but provides no explicit alternative or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not reference sibling tools like cap_account_history_activity for context.

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