getTokenBalance

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no additional behavioral context and even introduces confusion by referencing a non-existent parameter. It does not contradict annotations but fails to disclose any meaningful behavior beyond what annotations offer.

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 a single sentence, but it is unclear and misleading. It wastes the opportunity to convey essential details and includes an erroneous reference to 'query params' that is not accurate for the tool's structured parameters.

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 tool has no output schema and is surrounded by many sibling tools with similar purposes. The description is too sparse to distinguish it, omits how the token is specified, and does not clarify return format or auth requirements beyond parameter names.

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 67% (authToken and walletAddress have descriptions; chainName has only a const). The description adds no value to existing parameters and instead refers to a 'token address' parameter that is not in the schema, potentially misleading the agent into passing an invalid parameter.

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 states the verb and resource ('Get token balance for address') but incorrectly mentions a 'token address in query params' that does not exist in the schema. This makes the tool's purpose ambiguous and misleading, especially given sibling tools like getERC20Balance and getTokenBalancePortfolio.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention supported token standards, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without criteria for selecting this tool over similar siblings.

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