get_allowed_deposit_coins

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies the tool is read-only ('Get') but does not explicitly confirm safety, idempotency, or any side effects. No behavioral traits beyond the basic operation are disclosed.

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 extremely concise: one sentence for purpose, followed by a bulleted parameter list. It is front-loaded with the main action. No extraneous information.

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?

The tool has no output schema, and the description does not explain what fields or data the 'allowed deposit coin info' contains. It also omits details about pagination, sorting, or any constraints beyond the parameters. The simplicity of the tool (2 optional params) is not fully leveraged for completeness.

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 description adds meaning to the parameters beyond the schema titles: 'coin' is described as 'Filter by coin' and 'limit' as 'Number of records (default: 50)'. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage, but the explanations are minimal.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'allowed deposit coin info'. It is specific enough to distinguish from other tools like 'get_deposit_records' or 'get_coin_info'. However, it does not elaborate on what 'info' entails, which slightly reduces clarity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions. The description simply states what it does without advising on usage scenarios.

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