wallet_balance

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses automatic RPC failover, multiple chains, default tokens, and USD valuation via CoinGecko with caching. No destructive behavior is implied, which is appropriate for a read-only tool.

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 long, each providing essential information: what the tool does, what it returns, and when to use it. No unnecessary words.

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 no output schema, the description sufficiently explains return values (per-token balance, USD value, total portfolio value) and mentions important behavior like RPC failover and caching. For a wallet balance tool, this is 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 covers all 4 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds value by explaining default behavior (default tokens, CoinGecko with 60s cache) and the purpose of the tool. It reinforces and augments schema information.

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 wallet balances across EVM, Cosmos, and Solana chains, returns native and key ERC-20 token balances, and provides USD values. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning bridging operations.

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 explicitly says 'Call this before any bridging or farming operation to verify sufficient funds and gas,' providing clear when-to-use. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but context from sibling tools suggests this is the balance check tool.

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