get_balance

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

The description explicitly states the tool has no side effects and consumes no credits, which is critical behavioral information. With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden of transparency, and it does so effectively.

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 concise sentences front-load the core function and then provide usage context. A reference link is included. Every sentence is informative without redundancy.

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 the tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool returns (balance and SMS count) and its side-effect-free behavior. It is complete enough for an agent to understand when to use and what to expect.

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 input schema has no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining what the response contains (balance and SMS count), which goes beyond simply naming the tool. Given the absence of parameters, this explanation is valuable for correct usage.

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 returns TL balance and number of standard SMS messages it can fund. It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('balance'). No sibling tools serve a similar purpose, so it is well-differentiated.

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?

Explicitly states the tool is safe for verifying authentication and checking remaining budget before a campaign, giving clear context for when to use. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but no sibling performs a similar function.

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