ghl_saas_get_location_wallet_balance

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it requires agency-level token and specifies the OAuth scope. It also states the return value is a 'resource object with balance details.' No contradiction with annotations, which declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint.

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 concise with five sentences, front-loaded with the crucial security requirement. Minor redundancy (repeating 'Get Location Wallet Balance' in title and first sentence) but overall efficient.

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 with full annotation coverage, the description explains the security context and return type. It does not detail the structure of the balance details, but without an output schema, this is sufficient.

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 schema covers both parameters with descriptions, and the description adds no further parameter-level semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate given full schema coverage.

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 the action: 'Get Location Wallet Balance' and 'Fetch the wallet balance for a specific location.' It effectively distinguishes itself from its sibling tool 'ghl_saas_update_location_wallet_balance' by specifying the read-only nature.

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 explicitly mentions the requirement for an Agency-Level token and OAuth scopes, providing strong usage constraints. It implies that this tool is for reading the balance, contrasting with the update sibling, but does not state explicit when-not-to-use or list all alternatives.

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