queryDepositRecords

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, so the safe read nature is known. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond that: main/sub API key support, the 30-day window constraint, millisecond-to-second granularity quirk, id precedence, and the txID date cutoff. This is strong supplementary transparency, though it omits any pagination or response behavior.

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 description is a tight set of four bullet points with no fluff. The core purpose is front-loaded, and every bullet adds a distinct non-obvious fact. It is easy to scan and parse.

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 the most important behavioral constraints for this 7-parameter read-only tool. However, with no output schema and no explanation of cursor-based pagination, coin filtering, or limit semantics, it is not fully complete for an agent that may need to paginate or filter by coin.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden for parameter meaning. It usefully explains startTime/endTime range and granularity, id precedence, and txID date restriction. However, it says nothing about coin, limit, or cursor, leaving cursor especially opaque for an agent needing pagination.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Query on-chain deposit records'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like queryInternalDepositRecords and querySubMemberDepositRecords by emphasizing 'on-chain' deposits. No ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 useful usage constraints such as the 30-day time range, id priority, and txID date limitation. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the closely related sibling tools like queryInternalDepositRecords or querySubMemberDepositRecords. The usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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