Get your buyer wallet

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond them by pre-announcing the response contents (balance plus top-up page), which matters because there is no output schema. It says nothing about currency, error cases, or auth, which caps it below 5.

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 sentence that leads with the triggering condition and then the returned data. No filler, no restatement of the title beyond what is needed.

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 zero-parameter read with no output schema, the description covers both when to call it and roughly what comes back, which is enough to invoke it correctly. Minor gaps are that it does not name the balance's currency/format or what 'page' means operationally.

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 tool takes zero parameters and the schema is trivially complete, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. The default baseline of 4 applies.

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 a specific verb and resource — it answers the balance of the buyer wallet — and even names the secondary return value (the top-up page). 'Buyer wallet' implicitly separates it from the sibling growwer_get_seller_wallet, though it never explicitly contrasts the two.

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?

"Use this when the user asks how much they can spend" gives a concrete triggering intent, which is stronger than most definitions. It stops short of stating exclusions or pointing at alternatives such as growwer_list_buyer_transactions for spending history.

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