BinanceGetNFTDepositHistory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It mentions the returned fields (network, contract address, token ID, transaction ID, timestamps) but does not disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, or how the startTime/endTime parameters affect the query.

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 a single, concise sentence that delivers essential information without wasted words. It clearly states the resource and key output fields.

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 no annotations, the description adequately covers the main purpose and return fields. It is missing minor details like default time range or pagination limits, but for a simple history-fetch tool, it is sufficiently complete.

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 input schema has 100% coverage, with descriptions for all 5 parameters. The tool description adds no extra semantic detail for the parameters beyond listing some response fields, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves NFT deposit history, listing key return fields. It distinguishes from siblings like BinanceGetNFTWithdrawHistory and BinanceGetNFTTransactionHistory by specifying 'deposit'.

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 intended use is implied by the name and description but not explicitly stated. No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools for withdrawals or transactions, nor any context on time ranges or pagination.

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