get_single_manual_crypto

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already declares this as a safe read operation, so the description does not need to repeat that. It adds the prerequisite discovery context, which is useful but not a deep behavioral trait. No additional behavior like error handling or response format is disclosed, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The primary action is stated first, followed by a necessary prerequisite. The entire description earns its place and is immediately scannable.

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 simple one-parameter read-only tool with a high-coverage schema and readOnlyHint annotation, this description covers the essential context: what it does, how to identify the target, and how to discover valid IDs. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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%, and the parameter schema already describes crypto_id as 'Id of the manual crypto balance to retrieve.' The description merely says 'by ID' and refers to discovering ids via get_all_manual_crypto, which adds no new meaning beyond the schema. With the schema carrying full weight, a score of 3 is correct.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('single manually-managed crypto balance') with a clear identifier ('by ID'). It distinguishes from siblings like get_all_manual_crypto and get_single_synced_crypto through the 'manually-managed' qualifier and singular form.

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 explicitly says 'Call get_all_manual_crypto first to discover ids', giving an actionable prerequisite and making the tool's position in the workflow clear. It does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use this tool, but the sequencing instruction is strong enough to guide an agent.

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