theta_get_balance

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

The description declares 'Read-only', which is a key behavioral trait indicating no side effects. However, it does not elaborate on potential error conditions (e.g., invalid wallet address), rate limits, or what happens if the token_contract parameter is omitted. Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden.

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 very concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word appears necessary, but a small addition about the token_contract parameter could improve completeness without much bloat.

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 no output schema and low schema coverage, the description should provide more context. It fails to explain return format (e.g., does it return both balances? in what units?), error behavior, or default behavior when token_contract is omitted. This limits an agent's ability to correctly interpret results.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It explains the resource (wallet for TFUEL and WAVE tokens) but does not clarify the role of the optional token_contract parameter—whether it filters to a specific token contract, or what format it expects. The required wallet_address is self-explanatory from its name.

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 TFUEL and WAVE token balance for a wallet', which is specific about the action (get balance) and resource (wallet for two token types). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like theta_get_transaction which deals with transaction details.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or situations where other tools might be more appropriate (e.g., checking a different token).

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