get_account_summary

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Get ... summary' strongly implies read-only behavior and the listed fields clarify what is returned, but it does not explicitly state that it performs no side effects or mention any access requirements or caveats.

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?

One succinct sentence that names the resource, scope, and core returned information with no filler. Every word contributes meaning, and the key scope qualifier 'for a currency' is front-loaded.

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 low-complexity two-parameter tool, the description is nearly complete: it names the currency scope and the expected summary fields. It does not describe the optional extended parameter's effect, but the schema already covers that, so an agent has enough information to call the tool correctly.

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%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds the semantic scope 'for a currency,' which aligns with the required currency parameter, but it adds no detail about the optional extended parameter beyond what the schema already provides.

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 ('Get') and resource ('account balance, equity, margin usage, and P&L summary') scoped to a currency. It clearly states what the tool returns, though it does not explicitly contrast it with siblings like get_portfolio_summary or get_margins.

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 wording implies this tool is for retrieving a per-currency financial summary, but it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or exclusions. An agent must infer usage from the resource terms rather than being told when to prefer this over similar account or margin tools.

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