accountCoinBalanceQuery

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that it supports querying sub UID balance with master API key and enumerates parameter dependencies. The verb 'query' implies it is a read operation with no side effects, which is transparent enough.

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 short, uses a paragraph with bullet points, and is front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 tool has 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description covers usage scenarios well but does not describe the return format or any pagination/limitations. For a query tool, some mention of the response structure would enhance completeness.

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 input schema has 8 parameters with 0% schema description coverage, but the description adds meaning to several key parameters (e.g., required ones, memberId for sub UID, toMemberId+toAccountType for cross-account). However, it does not cover all parameters like `withBonus` or `withTransferSafeAmount`, leaving gaps.

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 it queries the balance of a specific coin in a specific account type, and mentions additional capabilities like sub UID balance and cross-account transferable balance. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like getAccountInfo, queryBalance, etc., which are more general.

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 specific conditions for using the tool, such as requiring `accountType` and `coin`, and notes when `memberId` or `toMemberId`+`toAccountType` are needed. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, which would improve guidance.

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