hashport_get_assets_amounts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Get' implies a read operation, the description doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, has rate limits, returns real-time or cached data, or what format the response takes. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 that communicates the core purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a zero-parameter tool and front-loads the essential 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?

For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately states what the tool does. However, without annotations or output schema, it should ideally provide more behavioral context about what 'reserve amounts' means and what format the response takes. The description is minimally viable but lacks completeness for a tool that presumably returns financial data.

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 has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist. It correctly focuses on the tool's purpose rather than parameter details.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('reserve amounts for all assets on Hashport'), providing specific purpose. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'hashport_get_network_asset_amounts' or 'hashport_get_supported_assets', which might have overlapping functionality.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple hashport_get_* siblings available, the description doesn't indicate whether this is the comprehensive reserve amounts tool or how it differs from similar-sounding tools like 'hashport_get_network_asset_amounts'.

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