get_sub_deposit_records

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action ('Get on-chain deposit records') without mentioning idempotency, read-only nature, authorization requirements, or rate limits. The lack of detail leaves the agent uninformed about side effects or constraints.

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 and front-loaded with the core action. It uses a brief docstring format with clear parameter explanations. No superfluous content.

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 should describe return values, pagination, or record structure. It only mentions parameters, leaving the agent guessing about the response format. For a simple list retrieval, more context is needed.

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 adds meaning by briefly explaining parameters: sub_member_id is 'Sub UID', coin is 'Filter by coin (optional)', limit is 'Number of records (default: 50)'. This is helpful but minimal; it does not elaborate on formats or allowed values.

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 it retrieves sub account on-chain deposit records, which is a specific verb-resource combination. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_broker_sub_deposit_record, the name and context provide sufficient 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 (e.g., get_broker_sub_deposit_record for broker sub-accounts). The description only lists parameters, lacking context on prerequisites or exclusions.

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