get_token_balance

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

Annotations declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent. The description adds valuable behavioral details: automatic resolution of symbols to contract addresses via JustLend markets, and that the balance is pre-formatted (decimals applied) so agents must not re-divide. This exceeds annotation-only information.

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?

Four short sentences that front-load the purpose and quickly deliver key usage warnings. Every sentence adds value; no fluff.

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 no output schema, the description explains return format (formatted balance) and critical usage nuances. It covers the main edge case (deprecated addresses) and defaults. Slightly incomplete on error handling for invalid symbols, but adequate for the tool's simplicity.

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% with good descriptions. The description adds extra semantics: the preference for symbol over address, the auto-resolution mechanism, and the formatting behavior. This provides context beyond the raw 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 clearly states 'Get TRC20 token balance for an address' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., get_trx_balance, get_strx_balance) by focusing on TRC20 tokens. The explanation of symbol vs. address resolution adds clarity.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'Always prefer using token symbols over raw addresses' with a concrete example and rationale about deprecated addresses. This tells the agent when and how to use the parameters correctly.

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