get_wallet_balance

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

The description adds that the tool includes 'account risk information' beyond a simple balance, but does not discuss authorization, rate limits, or any side effects. The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, but the description does not elaborate on what openWorldHint entails. No contradictions.

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 short (two sentences for purpose, then a clear arg list) and front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description need not detail return values. It covers the tool's scope and both parameters adequately. Minor gap: it does not mention that accountType is required, but that's clear from the schema.

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 description adds substantial value beyond the schema, which has 0% coverage. It enumerates valid values for accountType and explains the behavior of the coin parameter (returns all coins if omitted). This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 clearly states 'Get wallet balance and account risk information' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like get_coin_balance (which gets a single coin balance) and get_account_info (which may provide broader account data).

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 implies usage when wallet balance or risk information is needed, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like get_coin_balance or get_account_info. No exclusion criteria or comparative guidance is provided.

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