ramzinex_get_funds

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly states 'read-only' and 'Requires configured credentials,' and maps to a specific API endpoint. This informs the agent that the tool performs a safe, authenticated query with no side effects. However, it does not detail rate limits or response format, but for a simple balance retrieval 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 concise, including the core purpose, a note on credentials, the API endpoint, and parameter documentation. The Persian phrase adds minor redundancy but does not harm clarity. Overall, it is efficiently structured and front-loaded with the most important information.

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 an output schema (not shown), so return values are presumably documented there. The description covers the purpose, parameter, and authentication requirement. It is complete enough for a read-only balance tool, though it could mention that it returns data for all currencies in one call.

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 schema description coverage at 0%, the description adds value by explaining that the 'instance' parameter is a configured instance and that omitting it uses the default. This clarifies the parameter's purpose beyond the schema type definition. The single parameter is well covered.

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 verb ('Get'), the resource ('full balance details'), and the scope ('for all currencies'). It also explicitly marks the tool as read-only, which distinguishes it from siblings like ramzinex_get_available_balance or ramzinex_get_balance_summary that likely provide more limited views.

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 mentions that configured credentials are required but does not compare this tool to its many siblings (e.g., when to use get_funds vs get_available_balance). The usage context is only implied: when full balance details are needed. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations are given.

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