sbtc_get_deposit_info

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden; 'Get information' successfully implies a read-only, side-effect-free call. But it discloses nothing about what the info contains (deposit address, minimums, confirmation steps), whether a wallet must be unlocked or configured, or any network prerequisites.

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 purpose is stated in one front-loaded sentence. The trailing 'Tip' about earning_opportunities is a cross-sell that is only loosely related to depositing BTC and does not quite earn 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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description must convey what the agent gets back, and it stays at the level of 'information.' For a zero-parameter info tool this is workable but leaves the agent unsure whether the response is instructions, an address, or config requirements.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, and the empty object schema makes that unambiguous; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies for a no-parameter tool.

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 information about how to deposit BTC to receive sBTC') and makes the informational, non-mutating nature clear. It does not, however, distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as sbtc_deposit, sbtc_deposit_status, or sbtc_get_peg_info, which an agent could easily confuse it with.

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 only implied ('how to deposit' suggests a pre-flight/learn step before sbtc_deposit), and no alternative or exclusion is named. The one pointer given routes to earning_opportunities, which is a different concern (yield), not a substitute for this tool.

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