get_single_synced_crypto

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

readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, and the description adds useful context by stating the response includes the account plus all nested balances. It does not cover error behavior or response edge cases, but those are less critical given the annotation.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant schema restatement. Every word contributes meaning, which is ideal for a one-parameter getter tool.

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 one-parameter, read-only lookup, the description plus schema and annotations provide enough information to select and invoke the tool correctly. It even states the return scope (account + nested balances), which is valuable because no output schema exists.

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 only parameter is fully documented in the schema with a clear description, so there is no coverage gap. The description's 'by ID' merely restates the schema's meaning without adding new semantic detail, earning the baseline score.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('single synced crypto account'), and scope qualifier ('all its nested balances'). It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like get_all_synced_crypto and get_single_manual_crypto without requiring schema inspection.

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 'single' and 'by ID' phrasing gives clear context that this tool is for retrieving one specific synced crypto account rather than listing all of them. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the usage context is unambiguous for selection.

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