bank_get_balance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It accurately implies a read-only operation (getting balance) and specifies it returns both current and available balance. However, it does not mention potential side effects of the refresh parameter or any rate limits, though the refresh behavior is covered in the schema.

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 with no unnecessary words. The core function is front-loaded, and the prerequisite instruction is concise. This is an example of efficient specification.

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 simple balance lookup tool with two well-documented parameters, the description is sufficient. It names the exact resource and necessary input. The lack of output schema is not problematic for such a straightforward operation, and the relationship to list_accounts is clarified.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage of parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra value by advising how to obtain the account ID ('Use list_accounts to find the ID'), which directly helps the agent understand the relationship between parameters and sibling tools, exceeding the schema's generic description.

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 verb 'Get' and the specific resource 'current and available balance' for one bank account, identified by Akahu account ID. It distinguishes itself from siblings like bank_get_transactions (which would fetch transactions) and list_accounts (which lists accounts), making it unambiguous.

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?

It explicitly tells the user to use list_accounts to find the account ID, which is a clear prerequisite. It does not mention when not to use it or alternative tools for similar purposes, but it provides a direct contextual hint for the primary workflow.

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