jingswap_get_depositors

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 discloses the return format ('arrays of Stacks addresses on each side') and a concrete limit ('Max 50 depositors per side'), which are useful behavioral details beyond a bare 'get'.

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 core information is front-loaded and concise. The trailing tip about earning_opportunities is short but only marginally relevant to invoking this tool, keeping it from a perfect score.

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?

For a simple two-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description supplies the key return shape and limit. It is largely complete, though it could clarify the distinction from get_user_deposit.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the 'cycle' and 'market' parameters. The description reinforces the cycle context and mentions both sides but does not add syntax or format details beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get the list of token B and sBTC depositors for a specific auction cycle.' It also specifies the return shape and limit, making the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinct from siblings like get_user_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?

Usage is implied by 'for a specific auction cycle' and the max-50 note, but the description does not explicitly say when to use this versus alternatives such as jingswap_get_user_deposit. The tip about earning_opportunities is unrelated to selecting this tool.

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