get_equity_balances

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only mentions the content of the response (shares, market value, prices) but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, required permissions, potential side effects, or pagination behavior. The implication of a 'get' is not enough to satisfy this dimension.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose and key return fields. There is no wasted phrasing or redundancy.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must explain return values. It lists shares, market value, and prices but uses 'including' to imply non-exhaustive coverage. It does not specify whether the result is a list or single object, or whether there are additional fields. Given the tool's simplicity, this is adequate but not fully complete.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics since there are none. It adds value by indicating the kind of data returned, but this is not parameter-related.

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 retrieves detailed Indonesian stock holdings (Saham) with shares, market value, and prices. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('equity balances'), and the qualifier 'Indonesian' distinguishes it from sibling balance tools.

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?

The description provides context (Indonesian stocks) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like cash or bond balances. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, so the agent is left to infer usage based on the tool name and sibling listings.

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