bank.get_balance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It only states that it gets balances, but does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior, authentication requirements, or any nuances of 'current/available' (e.g., real-time or cached values). The description adds minimal transparency beyond the tool name.

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 a single concise sentence of nine words, directly stating the tool's purpose without filler. Structure is front-loaded and clear.

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?

The output schema exists, so return values are likely documented elsewhere. However, the description lacks key context such as how to obtain account_uid (via bank.list_accounts), whether both current and available balances are always returned, and any prerequisites. With no annotations, the description is only minimally complete for a simple getter tool.

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 0%, and the description does not mention the parameters (institution and account_uid) at all. It adds no meaning beyond the property names, leaving the agent without clarity on expected formats, required relationships, or how the parameters are used to identify the account.

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 the specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'current/available balances for a bank account,' which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like bank.list_accounts that list accounts rather than balances. The scope is explicit and unambiguous.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that account_uid can be obtained from bank.list_accounts or clarify when get_balance is preferred over other bank tools. Usage context is entirely implied rather than stated.

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