setDefaultDepositToAccount

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: main UID requirement, sub-account restriction, default FUND wallet, UTA 2.0 restriction, and KYC limits. It does not mention immediate effect or response, but for a setter this is adequate.

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 single sentence followed by four bullet points, no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and efficiently lists constraints.

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 mutation tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, restrictions, and defaults. It lacks response details but is complete enough for an agent to understand usage.

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 0%, so description must explain parameters. It mentions 'FUND' as default and 'CONTRACT' is restricted, but 'CONTRACT' is not an option in the enum. It does not explain what 'UNIFIED' means, leaving ambiguity for the sole parameter.

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 'Set the default account type for receiving on-chain deposit funds,' specifying the verb 'Set' and the resource 'default account type for on-chain deposits.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like accountBorrow or addLiquidity.

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 explicit usage constraints: only main UID API key can call, sub-accounts disallowed, and KYC restrictions apply. It also notes the default behavior and limitations for UTA 2.0 users. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives or state when not to use.

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