bonzo_get_account

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It implies a read-only operation ('Get') but doesn't disclose details like authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what 'positions' entail (e.g., types of assets, formatting). This is inadequate for a tool with potential financial data sensitivity.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose ('Get account positions') and includes essential context ('from Bonzo Finance'), making it easy to parse quickly.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what 'positions' include (e.g., balances, tokens), return format, or error handling, which are critical for an agent to use this financial data tool effectively.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'accountId' fully documented in the schema as a Hedera account ID with an example. The description adds no additional parameter context beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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') and resource ('account positions') with the source ('from Bonzo Finance'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'bonzo_get_liquidations' or 'bonzo_get_reserves', which likely retrieve different financial data from the same platform.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid account ID), exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer usage context solely from the tool name and schema.

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