get_token_balance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Get the balance' implies a read-only query, which is reassuring for a low-risk operation, but it doesn't disclose what the response contains, whether it fails on unknown tokens, or any rate/permission constraints.

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?

Front-loaded core purpose with the token-format guidance immediately after; the closing 'Tip' about earning_opportunities is a useful cross-reference though slightly peripheral to the core operation.

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 input side is well covered, but with no output schema and no annotations, the description stops short of describing the return value (amount/decimals/format) an agent would want to interpret the balance, leaving a gap for a query 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is already covered, but the description adds real value by spelling out the contract-ID syntax ('address.contract-name') and a fuller set of symbol examples, clarifying how the token param is actually formed.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Get the balance of any SIP-010 token') scoped to a wallet address, and the SIP-010 qualifier cleanly distinguishes it from siblings like get_stx_balance, get_btc_balance, and sbtc_get_balance.

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?

Gives concrete input examples (symbols sBTC/USDCx/ALEX/DIKO, or a contract ID) and refers to earning_opportunities as a follow-on, but never says when to prefer this over get_stx_balance or sbtc_get_balance, so the choice between balance tools is only implied.

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