check_allowance

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, safe behavior. Description adds value by explaining returned allowance is in human-readable units and that 'allowanceUnit' indicates token symbol. No contradictions. Adds useful behavioral context beyond 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?

Five sentences, front-loaded with main purpose. Every sentence provides essential information without redundancy. Highly efficient and structured.

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?

Despite lacking output schema, description explains return values and their meaning (allowance in human-readable, allowanceUnit). Covers when to use, behavior, and parameter usage. Fully adequate for a read-only check tool with comprehensive annotations and schema.

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. Description adds meaning by clarifying that 'amount' parameter is human-readable and that returned fields like 'allowance' are in human-readable units. Adds context on how to interpret results.

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?

Description clearly states it checks TRC20 token approval for a jToken market, specifies it's needed before supply/repay for TRC20 markets and not for jTRX. Provides details on return format. Though doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, the unique purpose is evident.

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 describes when to use (before supply/repay for TRC20 markets) and when not needed (jTRX). Advises to compare returned allowance directly with amount. Provides clear context for when this tool is appropriate.

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