getTokenBalancePortfolio

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly and idempotent true, and the description adds meaningful behavior: the timeframe is user-configurable with a 30-day default. This goes beyond the structured metadata, although it does not cover pagination or exact response shape.

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 that is front-loaded with the core purpose. The phrase 'Commonly used' is filler, but overall it avoids unnecessary detail and is easy to scan.

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 simple read-only tool, the description communicates the primary result and adds a useful default timeframe. However, the missing timeframe parameter in the schema creates a mismatch, and the lack of any return value description (no output schema) leaves some ambiguity about the exact output.

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%, but the description adds little to parameter understanding. It mentions a configurable timeframe that is not present in the schema (which only has chainName, walletAddress, authToken), and it does not clarify authToken or chainName usage.

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 tool renders a daily portfolio balance broken down by token, which clearly distinguishes it from single-token balance tools like getTokenBalance. However, the verb 'render' is imprecise and it does not explicitly differentiate from getHistoricalBalance.

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?

'Commonly used to render a daily portfolio balance' implies a use case but gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives or when not to use it. The context is clear but exclusions and alternative tool references are absent.

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