get_wallet_balance

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

The description adds a useful behavioral detail about return units (satoshis or cents), but it does not disclose error handling, authentication needs, or when each currency is used. With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden but only partially fulfills it.

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 two concise sentences with no redundancy. It front-loads the primary action and includes a valuable return-unit detail, earning its place.

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 description is adequate for a simple getter, but it lacks the response shape and the conditions for when BTC vs USD is returned. Since there is no output schema, these details would improve completeness, but the core purpose is covered.

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 fully documents the wallet_id parameter with a description, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 tool gets the balance of a specific wallet by ID, with a specific resource (wallet balance) and scope (by wallet ID). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like get_wallets (which lists all wallets) and get_account_info (account-level 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?

The description clearly implies usage: use when you have a wallet_id and need its current balance. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous given the tool name and description.

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