getMyStarBalance

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 discloses the success return type (StarAmount object) and implies a read-only operation via 'Returns,' but it does not describe error conditions, side effects, or authorization requirements. This is adequate for a simple getter but leaves notable gaps.

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 two sentences with no filler or redundancy. It front-loads the core action and follows with the return type, making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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 zero-parameter getter with no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it specifies the resource being queried and the success return shape. A minor gap is the lack of explicit contrast with getBusinessAccountStarBalance, but the wording 'bot's current balance' sufficiently disambiguates from that sibling.

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, and the input schema is empty, so schema coverage is vacuously 100%. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately adds no parameter details because there are none to clarify.

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 a specific verb ('Returns') and identifies the exact resource ('bot's current balance in Telegram Stars'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It also differentiates from siblings such as getBusinessAccountStarBalance (business account balance) and getStarTransactions (transaction history).

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 intended usage is implied by the phrase 'bot's current balance,' so an agent can infer this is the correct tool for checking the bot's Stars balance. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this over getBusinessAccountStarBalance or mention any exclusions or alternatives.

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