get_sui_all_balances

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Get all coin balances' implies a read-only operation, it doesn't specify whether this includes native tokens only or all token types, whether results are paginated, or what format the response takes. The description is minimal and lacks important operational context.

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, efficient sentence that communicates the core functionality without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a straightforward tool and gets directly to the point with clear subject-verb-object structure.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what 'all coin balances' means in practice, what data structure to expect in response, or any limitations or special considerations. Given the lack of structured metadata, the description should provide more operational context.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema already fully documents both parameters ('address' and 'network'). The description doesn't add any meaningful parameter context beyond what's already in the schema, such as address format requirements or network implications. The baseline score of 3 reflects adequate but unenhanced parameter documentation.

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 action ('Get all coin balances') and target resource ('for a Sui address'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_sui_balance' or 'compare_balances', which likely serve related but distinct functions.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'get_sui_balance' and 'compare_balances' available, there's no indication of when this comprehensive balance retrieval is preferred over more specific queries.

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