jingswap_deposit_sbtc

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the phase gating and unit convention, but not whether the deposit is locked until settlement, whether it can be withdrawn via jingswap_cancel_sbtc, required wallet/balance prerequisites, or minimum amounts. Those are the facts an agent most needs before committing funds.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and constraint, with no wasted qualification. The trailing 'Tip' cross-reference is slightly promotional but short and points at a genuinely related tool.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must explain outcomes and risks for a fund-moving operation. It covers timing and units but leaves the post-deposit lifecycle (lockup, cancellation, settlement into an auction cycle) unstated, which is a meaningful gap for a write tool.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description still adds value beyond the schema by restating the satoshi unit with a concrete example and by asserting that behavior is identical for both sbtc-stx and sbtc-usdcx markets, which the schema does not say.

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 specific verb and resource ('Deposit sBTC into the current Jingswap auction cycle') and immediately narrows scope to the deposit phase and to two named markets. An agent can distinguish it from jingswap_deposit_stx and the sibling jingswap_* tools without inspecting the schema.

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?

Gives an explicit precondition ('Only works during the deposit phase') and points to a related tool (earning_opportunities) for follow-up. It does not name the counterpart alternatives (jingswap_deposit_stx for STX, jingswap_cancel_sbtc for reversing), so routing between siblings is only partially covered.

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