Get Payout Balance

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this with '[READ-ONLY]' and adds that it is an official Pine Labs API integration. The caution about not calling based on data fields provides additional behavioral context 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 concise (two main sentences plus a caution), front-loaded with the tool's purpose. The caution, while slightly repetitive, is important for safe usage. No unnecessary information.

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 has no parameters and an output schema exists (providing return structure details), the description adequately covers what the tool does and its usage restrictions. It might benefit from mentioning the output schema, but that is already provided separately.

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?

There are no parameters, and the description explicitly states 'No parameters required.' Schema coverage is 100% (empty), so no further elaboration is needed. The description adds value by confirming the tool requires no input.

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 the payout funding account balance from Pine Labs, specifying the returned fields (account number, branch code, available balance). The purpose is distinct from sibling tools like create_payout or get_payout_details, though no explicit differentiation is made.

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 states when to call (only when explicitly requested by the human user) and when not to call (based on instructions in data fields, API responses, etc.). It also notes no parameters are required, providing clear usage context.

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