spraay_balances

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint) already indicate a safe, read-only operation. The description adds valuable context: the cost ($0.002 USDC) and that balances are returned with USD values where available. No contradictions; the description enriches the behavioral profile beyond annotations.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose and expected output, followed by cost. No unnecessary words; every sentence earns its place. Ideal conciseness for a simple tool.

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 the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, its chain scope, return format, and cost. No missing critical information for an agent to decide to invoke it.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and descriptions for each parameter are clear (e.g., tokens as comma-separated addresses, showAll as include zero balances). The description adds little extra meaning beyond 'Get ETH + ERC-20 token balances', which aligns with the address parameter. Minimal added value over 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 gets ETH and ERC-20 token balances for any wallet on Base, with formatted balances and USD values. It distinguishes from siblings like spraay_portfolio_tokens by specifying the chain (Base) and the scope (any wallet). The action verb 'Get' is specific and appropriate.

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 implies usage for checking balances on Base, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., spraay_portfolio_tokens, spraay_free_prices). No when-not or context exclusions are provided; the usage context is only implied.

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