get_dac_balance

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

With no annotations, the description conveys the operation is a check/read action, implying no side effects. It adds detail about the two balance types. It does not explicitly state security or error behavior, but for a simple balance check, this is adequate.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and immediately clarifies the two balance types. No unnecessary words.

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 is simple with a single parameter and no output schema. The description conveys what will be returned (balance types) and when to use it, making it sufficiently complete for an agent.

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 fully documents the only parameter (auth_token), and the description does not add additional parameter information. Baseline of 3 applies since schema coverage is 100%.

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 checks the user's DAC balance, differentiating between External (funded) and Earned (from tool sales). This is specific and distinct from sibling tools like get_dac_ur or get_agent_profile.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use the tool ('Know what you have before you decide what to spend'), implying it should be used prior to spending actions. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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