jingswap_get_user_deposit

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' clearly implies a read-only operation and it specifies the exact scope (user + cycle), but it does not state behavior for non-depositors, missing cycles, or invalid addresses.

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 front-loaded and efficient. The second sentence is a promotional tip that is not relevant to selecting or invoking this tool, so not every sentence earns its place.

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 read-only getter with no output schema, the definition is minimally adequate. It does not describe the return shape or how to interpret the deposit amounts, which would help an agent understand the result.

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 the parameters cycle, market, and address are already documented. The description adds that returned amounts cover token B and sBTC, but does not clarify the market parameter's default or effect 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?

States a specific verb and resource: get a specific user's deposit amounts for a given auction cycle, and names the asset types (token B and sBTC). The 'specific user' scope implicitly distinguishes it from jingswap_get_depositors, though no sibling is named.

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 only guidance is a promotional tip pointing to earning_opportunities, not a when-to-use statement. It gives no indication of when to choose this over jingswap_get_depositors or jingswap_get_user_activity, nor any prerequisites.

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