accountCoinBalanceQuery

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description does not contradict them. It adds useful behavioral context around master API key sub UID access and cross-account transferable balance queries, which goes beyond the structured annotation fields.

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 compact and front-loaded: one clear opening sentence followed by a tight bullet list of conditional requirements. Every line adds decision-relevant information 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 description covers the key parameter dependencies and access-pattern nuance for a multi-mode balance query. It does not describe the return value, but for a balance query this is largely inferable, and no output schema is provided to supplement it. The main gap is the lack of explicit sibling differentiation.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well by explaining the roles and conditional requirements of accountType, coin, memberId, toMemberId, toAccountType, and withLtvTransferSafeAmount. It does not explain withBonus or withTransferSafeAmount, but the most important parameter semantics are clarified.

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 states a specific action ('Query the balance of a specific coin in a specific account type') with a clear resource and scope. It does not explicitly compare against sibling tools like getWalletBalance or queryBalance, but the parameter-focused wording makes the tool's purpose reasonably distinct.

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 clear conditional usage guidance: it specifies required parameters, when memberId is needed for sub UID queries, and when toMemberId/toAccountType are needed for cross-account queries. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but the within-tool scenarios are well covered.

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