get_my_balances

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and open-world behavior are covered structurally. The description adds only that values are converted to AUD with a rate, which is mild extra context; it says nothing about authentication requirements or what an empty account returns. Adequate but thin against the annotation baseline.

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 ten-word sentence that front-loads the verb and resource and wastes nothing. There is no filler, preamble, or 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?

With zero parameters, an output schema covering return values, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description has little left to carry. The one real gap is sibling disambiguation against get_my_balance, which the description omits.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate beyond the fact that no filtering arguments exist. Baseline 4 applies for a parameterless call.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('List all coin balances') plus the scope of returned data ('AUD value and rate'). However, it never differentiates itself from the near-identical sibling get_my_balance, leaving the agent to guess whether the singular tool is a subset, alias, or per-coin variant.

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?

No when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives, despite the sibling list containing get_my_balance and many other balance-adjacent tools (get_my_deposits, get_my_open_market_orders). Usage is only implied by the name.

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