get_balance

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Show' indicates a read-only operation with no side effects, and 'current prepaid balance in USD' specifies what is returned. It does not mention error cases or exact response format, but for a zero-parameter getter this is sufficient.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the action and object. Every word adds value: 'current,' 'prepaid,' 'balance,' and 'USD.'

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 zero parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description adequately covers tool selection and invocation. It could explicitly state the return type (e.g., numeric value), but the phrase 'balance in USD' makes this largely self-evident.

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 tool accepts no parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. The baseline of 4 applies because no compensation in the description is needed for undocumented parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Show') and a clear resource ('current prepaid balance in USD'), making the tool's function unambiguous. It also distinguishes itself from the image-generation/editing and model-list sibling 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 clearly implies that the tool should be used when an agent needs to check the current prepaid balance. No alternatives or exclusions are needed because the sibling tools are unrelated in function.

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