hl_spot_clearinghouse_state

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'balances' without stating whether the operation is read-only, what data is returned, or any side effects. It implies a state query but fails to explicitly disclose behavior, leaving the agent to infer safety and scope.

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 extremely short but under-specified. 'Spot clearinghouse balances (spotClearinghouseState)' is essentially a label, not a self-contained explanation. It leaves crucial information missing, making it more under-specified than concisely sufficient.

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 tool has one required parameter and no output schema visible in the prompt, yet the description gives no information about return values, error conditions, or behavioral nuances. It is completely inadequate for an agent to confidently invoke this tool without additional context.

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?

The schema has a 'user' parameter with zero description coverage, and the description does not explain it at all. The parameter's purpose, format, or how it affects results are completely undocumented. Given the low schema coverage, the description should compensate, but it does not.

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 identifies a specific resource (spot clearinghouse balances) and differentiates from sibling 'hl_clearinghouse_state' by including 'spot'. However, it uses a noun phrase without a verb, so it is unclear whether the tool retrieves, updates, or performs some other action. It is not misleading, but it lacks a clear action verb.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention how it relates to hl_clearinghouse_state or other user state tools, nor does it give any context for selecting it. There are no exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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