freee_get_balance_sheet

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool is efficient and returns pre-aggregated data via a single API call. However, it omits details like authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. The behavioral context is partial but not misleading.

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 two sentences and to the point, with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose ('Get balance sheet'). Could be slightly more structured but is efficiently written.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should hint at return values. It mentions assets, liabilities, and equity, which gives a basic idea. However, it lacks details on additional balance sheet components, pagination, or response format. Adequate for a simple 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 coverage is 100%, so the description adds limited value beyond the schema. It mentions pre-aggregated data but does not elaborate on parameter meaning or usage beyond what is already in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves a balance sheet with assets, liabilities, and equity pre-aggregated. It uses the specific verb 'Get' and resource 'balance sheet'. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like freee_get_trial_balance or freee_get_profit_loss, though it implies contrast by mentioning 'single API call replaces complex transaction aggregation'.

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 provides specific use cases: liquidity ratios, solvency analysis, working capital calculations. It implies when to use the tool but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools. No exclusions or comparisons are given, which leaves room for ambiguity.

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