get_rebalance_plan

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses required inputs and optional parameters but does not state read-only nature, side effects, or permission needs. The output schema exists but is not described here, reducing transparency.

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 three sentences, efficiently covering core functionality and key parameters. Minor ambiguity in the first sentence (noun phrase without verb) is acceptable given brevity.

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?

Despite the presence of an output schema (so return values need not be explained), the description fails to explain the structure of the object parameters or the format of the band_check block. This leaves significant gaps for correct invocation.

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?

Given 0% schema coverage, the description adds some meaning by naming `allocation_pct`, `target_pct`, `nav_usd`, and explaining the effect of `band` and `exchange`. However, it lacks details on the structure of the object parameters or valid values, which the schema alone cannot provide.

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 computes USD deltas and move lines for a target BTC/ETH/CASH split, naming required parameters. It communicates the core purpose but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like check_allocation_band which check bands rather than generate a full plan.

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 on when to use this tool versus siblings. The optional `band` parameter hints at overlap with check_allocation_band tools, but no explicit when/when-not advice is provided.

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