Drift Deposit

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

The description only states 'deposit tokens' without elaborating on side effects, prerequisites, or post-conditions. Annotations indicate it is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) but the description adds no further behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 first sentence is concise and clear. The second sentence about SAP MCP context is extraneous and adds clutter without direct relevance to the tool's operation. Removing it would improve conciseness.

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 description covers basic purpose but omits important details such as the return format (though output schema exists), the meaning of subAccountId, and whether a Drift account is automatically created. The SAP context does not contribute to 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. The parameter descriptions in the schema are adequate, so the description adds minimal value here.

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's action (deposit tokens) and the target resource (Drift account) and the purpose (trading or lending). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like drift_withdraw and drift_openPerpPosition.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It includes unrelated SAP MCP context that does not help with usage decisions. A clear 'when to use' statement is missing.

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