track_debt_balance

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It communicates return format but does not disclose side effects (e.g., is it read-only?), authentication needs, or rate limits. The description is minimal beyond the function's results.

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?

Description is concise and front-loaded with purpose. The Args/Returns section is somewhat redundant with schema but adds value. Minor improvement could remove duplication.

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 no annotations, simple parameters (2, one optional), and existence of output schema, description adequately covers purpose, parameter formats, and return structure. Could mention output schema's structure briefly.

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?

Zero schema coverage, yet description provides clear meaning: company_name accepts either name or 6-digit code, year is optional YYYY format. This adds essential context far beyond the raw 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?

Description clearly states the tool queries balances of 5 specific debt security types and aggregates maturity weight, using Korean narrative. Distinct from siblings like 'track_capital_structure' which focuses on equity.

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?

Implied usage for debt balance tracking, but no explicit when-to-use or comparison with siblings. The description does not guide the agent on when to choose this over alternatives like 'get_financial_summary'.

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