get_balance_history

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

The description adds context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by disclosing downsampling behavior ('Weekly and monthly modes downsample by keeping the last data point per period') and noting the accounts array in the response. No contradictions with annotations.

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 compact (4 sentences), front-loaded with the core purpose, and each sentence adds non-redundant information. No filler or 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?

Given 6 parameters (1 required) and no output schema, the description explains return fields, accounts array, granularity modes, and filtering. It covers pagination implicitly via offset/limit but does not mention ordering or error conditions. Fairly complete for the complexity.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining the effect of granularity on response density and mentioning filtering options. It also describes the response structure, which is not in the input schema.

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 specifically states 'Get daily balance snapshots for accounts over time' and lists the returned fields. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_accounts or get_transactions, which deal with different data.

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 explains that granularity is required and gives guidance on when to use weekly/monthly ('Use weekly or monthly for longer time ranges'). It also mentions filtering by account_id and date range. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives.

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