Get interim balances

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it only says 'returns' without disclosing any request requirements, side effects, auth constraints, or response behavior. It implies a read-only operation but adds no context beyond that.

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 sentence is short and front-loaded, but it mostly restates the title with an endpoint path. It is not bloated, yet it is too under-specified to be an effective standalone description.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, three undocumented parameters, and nested filters, a one-sentence endpoint echo is far from complete. The agent lacks the meaning of interim balances, parameter semantics, and return value expectations.

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 0%, so the description must explain card, date, and filters. It does not define any of them, what is required, or what shape 'filters' should take, leaving the agent without enough information to construct a valid call.

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 names a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('interim balances from /statements/interim/balance'), and the endpoint path distinguishes it from final-balance and transaction siblings. It does not explain what makes balances 'interim', so it is clear but not fully defined.

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 given about when to call this tool instead of get_balances, get_final_balances, or get_interim_transactions, and no exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned. An agent must guess which of the related sibling tools is appropriate.

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