cross_check_balance

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

No annotations given, but description fully covers behavior: checks three specific equations with tolerance, returns passed/failed/skipped status, handles missing fields gracefully, and notes annual-only support.

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?

Well-structured with intro, parameter details, return format example, and list of checks. Every sentence is informative and no 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?

Despite no output schema, description provides full return example and explains all statuses and tolerance. Parameter semantics are fully covered, and sibling references add context.

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?

Adds significant meaning beyond schema: explains stock_code format and links to sibling tool, clarifies year only supports annual reports, and includes example values.

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?

Clearly states the tool performs financial cross-check validation among three statements, distinguishing it from siblings like get_three_statements and compare_peers.

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?

Provides parameter specifics (stock_code supports multiple formats, year only annual reports) and lists the three checks. Does not explicitly exclude use cases, but context suffices.

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