get_program_balances_settlement

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It discloses that data includes settlement balance info and fund transfers and is day-level aggregated. However, it does not mention return format, pagination, or side effects (e.g., read-only nature), which leaves gaps for a tool with no output schema.

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 two sentences long, direct, and front-loaded. Every sentence contributes purpose (what, includes, granularity). No extraneous text.

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, the description should explain return values. It mentions inclusions (settlement balance info, fund transfers) and granularity but lacks details on return structure or default behavior (e.g., program override). The five parameters are covered in schema, so additional context on outputs is missing.

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?

All parameters are described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description adds minimal extra meaning. The mention of 'Day-level aggregation only' indirectly informs date filtering but does not elaborate on parameter usage or required formats beyond the schema.

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 tool gets settlement-based program balance data, specifying it includes settlement balance information and fund transfers, and notes day-level aggregation. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_activity_balances or get_program_balances.

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 for daily aggregated settlement data with 'Day-level aggregation only' but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. No comparison to sibling tools is provided.

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