Consultar saldo

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact beyond them: the query is free and does not consume tokens ('Sin costo'). It does not describe what the response contains (token count, expiration, etc.).

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?

Two short fragments with no filler, and the resource is front-loaded. It is slightly clipped for a purpose clause, but nothing is wasted.

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 trivial zero-parameter read tool this is nearly sufficient, but with no output schema the description is the only place a return-value description could live, and it never says what checking the balance actually yields.

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 takes zero parameters, which is the baseline-4 case. No parameter explanation is required, and the description correctly avoids inventing any.

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?

States the concrete resource (available tokens in the account) and its scope ('Extraer Datos de INE'), which is clearly distinct from the extraction sibling extraer_ine. The verb is implied rather than stated, but an agent can tell what it returns.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance or routing toward alternatives. 'Sin costo' implies the call is free and therefore safe to check before consuming resources, but this must be inferred rather than being stated as a condition.

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