balance_sheet

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only discloses 'read-only,' which is positive, but omits other behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, data freshness, or response format details beyond what the output schema provides.

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 extremely concise but lacks structure. It is a single sentence that conveys only the tool's name and read-only nature, but does not introduce parameters or usage context. It is under-informative despite being short.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (two optional date parameters, no required fields, output schema present), the description should still explain the purpose of the parameters and how the snapshot relates to time periods. It fails to do so, leaving the agent with insufficient context.

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 has two parameters (to_date, from_date) with 0% description coverage, and the description makes no mention of them. The agent receives no guidance on how to use date parameters, their format, or their meaning in the context of a balance sheet.

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 provides a 'Balance sheet snapshot' and is 'read-only,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools like profit_and_loss or trial_balance. However, it could be more specific about the scope (e.g., period, level of detail).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus other financial report tools (aged_receivables, profit_and_loss, etc.). It does not mention any conditions or exclusions.

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