get_account_balance

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

The description lacks behavioral disclosures such as authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or side effects. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and it fails to disclose whether the operation is read-only or if it requires prior account setup.

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 concise, front-loaded with the purpose, and structured with clear Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant or vague phrasing.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (implied by the Returns description), the description provides adequate information about the return value. However, it omits details on error handling, prerequisites (like account number validity), and the relationship to the sibling tool 'get_accounts'.

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?

Although the schema provides no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), the description compensates by explaining 'account_no' as a Kiwoom securities account number with an example, and 'use_mock' with its default behavior based on environment settings. This adds significant meaning beyond the 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 uses a specific verb '조회' (retrieve) and clearly identifies the resource as a specific account's total evaluation assets and detailed holdings list. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'get_accounts' which likely lists all accounts, thus providing clear differentiation.

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?

While the description explains the parameters, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No when-not-to-use scenarios or preconditions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer context from the sibling tool name alone.

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