Get Credit

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of disclosing behavior. It correctly implies a read-only operation with 'Fetch,' and 'current account credit balance' indicates the return value. However, it does not disclose response format, currency, or any access requirements, so transparency is basic but not rich.

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 that states the action and object with no wasted words. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (zero parameters, no output schema), the description is mostly complete: it states what the tool does and what it returns conceptually. However, it omits any detail about the value's format or units, which could matter for an agent, so it falls just short of perfect completeness.

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 for this dimension is 4. The description correctly adds no parameter information because there are none to document, making it appropriate for the schema.

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, 'Fetch,' and a clear resource, 'current account credit balance,' making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like credit_correction, which implies modification rather than retrieval.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any mention of constraints or prerequisites. The purpose is clear, but the description does not explicitly state that this should be used when checking credit balance or that credit_correction is for adjustments, so usage guidance is essentially absent.

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