fiken_list_bank_balances

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the operation is listing balances (presumably read-only) and mentions amounts in cents, but does not explicitly declare non-destructive behavior, permissions needed, or pagination. A list operation is typically safe, but more explicit disclosure would improve transparency.

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 sentences, the first front-loaded with action and resource, the second adding an important detail (amounts in cents). No wasted words.

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?

With a single required parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details on return format (e.g., array of objects with fields), pagination, or error conditions. Mentioning 'amounts in cents' is helpful but not exhaustive.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema description for companySlug already explains its purpose. The description adds no new meaning beyond the schema; it merely repeats 'all bank accounts'. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 lists bank balances for all bank accounts of a company, using the verb 'List' and resource 'bank balances'. It distinguishes from siblings like fiken_list_bank_accounts (which lists accounts, not balances).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., fiken_get_account_balance for a single account). The sibling list shows many tools but no selection criteria. User must infer from the description.

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