bitpin_get_wallet_balances

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the rate limit (60/min), the authentication requirement, and the max limit of 200. It doesn't explicitly confirm the operation is read-only or describe whether balances are live vs settled, leaving a small gap.

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?

A tight, front-loaded passage that packs purpose, filters, and operational constraints into a few lines with no filler. Slightly dense in list form but efficient.

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 read-only balances tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, filtering, and operational limits adequately. It doesn't describe the returned balance structure, but with no output schema that omission is minor.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description's examples (Persian asset names, service='main', limit max 200) largely restate the schema, so 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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('user wallet balances per asset on BitPin'), which is clearly distinct from siblings like get_account_numbers or get_commissions. It lacks an explicit pointer to the nearest alternative, so it stops short of 5.

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 filter context (assets, service, pagination) and the authentication requirement, implying when the tool applies. However, it never says when to prefer this over related tools or what the preconditions are beyond 'requires authentication'.

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