get_account_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 that the tool uses the daemon's own fresh balance/price snapshot to compute holdings value and total equity, which is a useful behavioral detail. It does not explicitly state that it is read-only or if calling it triggers any snapshot refresh, but the wording 'returns' and 'view' implies a read operation.

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 efficient and well-structured, leading with the main purpose, then breaking down the return components, and adding a clarifying sentence on total value and snapshot use. 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?

The return value is thoroughly explained, which is important given no output schema. However, the parameter semantics are entirely absent, and there is no guidance on error conditions or invocation context, leaving the tool only partially complete for an agent.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it provides no information about the parameters. The only hint is 'Hesabın' which relates to account_id, but request_id and idempotency_key are completely unaddressed, leaving the agent without guidance on their purpose.

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 returns the full account balance, breaking down free, locked, holdings value, and total equity, and emphasizes it goes beyond just free balance. This distinguishes it from a simpler balance query and is specific to the account resource.

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?

It provides clear context: this tool returns the real total value of the account, not just the free balance, indicating when it should be used for comprehensive balance information. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, though the emphasis on 'tam bakiye' implies it's the go-to for full balance.

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