Account Balances

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, indicating safe reading. The description adds no additional behavioral traits beyond the obvious (getting balances). For a zero-parameter readonly tool, this is adequate but does not go beyond what annotations cover.

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 highly concise: a single introductory sentence followed by clear bullet points for usage. Every sentence is purposeful and front-loaded with the main action.

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?

With no parameters and an existing output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does and when to use it. It is complete for a simple balance-checking tool.

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 input schema has 0 parameters (schema coverage 100%), so no parameter documentation is needed. The description adds context by mentioning token types (USDC, DIME), which helps the agent understand the output. Baseline for zero params is 4.

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 explicitly states 'Get token balances for your account' with specific examples like USDC and DIME. It distinguishes from sibling tools like account_overview or account_summary by focusing specifically on balances.

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 clearly lists when to use this tool with bullet points (check holdings, verify USDC before deposit/withdrawal, see all denominations). It provides example use cases but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternative tools. The context is clear enough for the agent.

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