liquid_get_balance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses a meaningful behavioral trait: 'Syncs with the chain before returning,' which indicates a network operation and potential latency. It also specifies 'spendable,' which implies confirmed or available balance. It does not explicitly state it is read-only, but the verb 'Get' strongly implies a non-mutating operation.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose ('Get the spendable L-BTC balance') and adds relevant details (satoshis, chain sync) efficiently.

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?

For a zero-parameter read-only balance tool, the description is complete. It specifies the currency (L-BTC), the wallet context, the unit (satoshis), and the behavior of syncing with the chain. No output schema exists, but the description makes the return value clear.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly avoids mentioning any parameters because none exist, and the schema confirms no inputs. No additional parameter explanation is needed.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and names the exact resource: the spendable L-BTC balance of the Liquid wallet, in satoshis. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like liquid_get_asset_balance, which handles other assets, and liquid_get_node_info, which is about node details.

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 clearly states the tool returns the spendable L-BTC balance, making it obvious when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or conditions for when not to use it, such as using liquid_get_asset_balance for non-BTC assets. Still, the context is clear enough for most use cases.

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