balances.list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It fails to indicate whether this is a read-only operation, what data structure is returned, or pagination behavior. 'List' implies reading but lacks safety or scope details.

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 single sentence is efficient and front-loaded, but undersized given the complete lack of schema documentation and annotations. It prioritizes brevity over necessary explanatory detail.

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?

Inadequate for a financial tool with zero schema documentation and no annotations. Missing explanations of the Ryft balance entity, return value structure, and the relationship between accountId and currency parameters.

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 for both parameters. It implicitly references 'currency' via 'for a currency' but completely omits 'accountId', its optionality, and the 3-character ISO format expectation for the currency code.

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?

States a clear verb ('List') and resource ('Ryft balances') with scope ('for a currency'). Implicitly distinguishes from sibling 'balanceTransactions.list' by referencing 'balances' rather than transactions, though explicit differentiation would strengthen it.

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 no guidance on when to use this versus 'accounts.get' or 'balanceTransactions.list', nor does it mention prerequisites such as requiring a valid account ID or authorization context.

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