vechainstats_get_vip180_balance

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get', implying a read operation, but does not mention error handling, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens if the address or contract is invalid. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the tool's name.

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, well-structured sentence that communicates the core function efficiently. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose with no redundancy.

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 has no output schema and only a minimal description. It does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., raw integer vs. formatted balance), the behavior when the 'contract' parameter is omitted (it is optional, so presumably a default token is used), or what 'expanded details' includes. This leaves significant gaps for an agent deciding how to use the tool.

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 already covers all three parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema; it references 'token contract' in the text but provides no new parameter-level insight.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('VIP-180 token balance'), and the scope ('for a specific address and token contract'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vechainstats_get_historic_balance (which retrieves historical balances) and vechainstats_get_account_info (which provides account details).

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 versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. For instance, it is not noted whether this tool is for VIP-180 tokens only and whether other tools should be used for native VET balance or other token standards.

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