x402_balance

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly states this is a read-only balance check ('Check... Shows...'), which implies no mutation. However, it does not disclose details like whether the wallet must be preconfigured, potential error conditions, or whether the native token balance includes wrapped natives. The description provides basic behavioral clarity but lacks richer context.

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 two sentences, clear, and front-loaded with the primary action. It contains no filler and every word serves a purpose.

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 simple balance-check tool with one optional parameter, the description is adequate but misses a few important details: the response format (e.g., decimals, symbol formatting) and how to interpret the balances. Also, the existence of the near-duplicate x402_check_balance is unaddressed, leaving a gap in tool selection.

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 schema already provides a description for the single 'chain' parameter (including default behavior), and coverage is 100%. The tool description does not add extra meaning about how the parameter affects the result (e.g., which native token per chain), so it does not go 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 clearly states the tool checks the x402 payment wallet balance and lists what it shows (USDs and native token balance). It uses a specific verb-resource pair. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling x402_check_balance, the description is sufficiently precise about its function.

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 provided on when to use this tool over alternatives. Notably, a sibling tool x402_check_balance exists, and the description does not clarify the difference between them. There is no mention of prerequisites, configuration, or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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