querySubMemberDepositRecords

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and open-world behavior. The description adds beyond annotations by disclosing the 30-day time range limit, the default range, the required subMemberId, and the parent-child relationship validation. These are meaningful behavioral details with no contradiction.

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 bullet list with the primary purpose front-loaded. Each sentence adds a distinct, non-redundant constraint, and there is no filler.

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 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers only a few key constraints. Missing are parameter semantics for most filters, pagination behavior, and return value details. The read-only annotation covers safety, but an agent still lacks enough information to correctly use many parameters.

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 must compensate. It explains subMemberId's requirement and the endTime/startTime constraint, but leaves coin, txID, cursor, limit, and id entirely unexplained. Only partial compensation is achieved.

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 clearly states a specific verb ('Query'), resource ('on-chain deposit records'), and target ('sub-account'), with the additional credential context ('main UID API key'). This helps distinguish it from deposit-query siblings like queryInternalDepositRecords or queryDepositRecords, though it doesn't explicitly name those alternatives.

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 gives clear context on when to use the tool: querying a sub-account's on-chain deposits, with required parent-child validation and the main API key. It implies the use case but does not explicitly mention alternatives or provide when-not-to-use conditions.

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