iota_wallet_balance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It implies a read-only operation by using 'get', and scopes to the 'current wallet', but it does not disclose return format, unit, or potential network interaction. It adds minimal behavioral context beyond the core function.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no fluff. Every word contributes to the meaning, and it is appropriately sized for a simple zero-parameter tool.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description sufficiently covers the action. It does not explain the return value or units, but 'balance' is inherently clear. Slight gap in not specifying whether it returns e.g., a number or string, but overall complete for its simplicity.

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 zero parameters, so there is nothing to explain. Baseline is 4 per the rubric, and the description correctly omits parameter details since none exist. No additional meaning is needed or provided.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get IOTA balance of the current wallet'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on balance, while siblings like iota_get_price, iota_wallet_address, and iota_wallet_accounts target different concerns.

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 context (use this to obtain the wallet's IOTA balance) without explicit alternatives or exclusions. While it doesn't mention when not to use it or name alternatives, the zero-parameter nature and distinct purpose make the usage straightforward.

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