ramzinex_refresh_deposits

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behavioral traits: it does not move funds, it re-scans for incoming deposits, and requires credentials. It does not mention rate limits or side effects, but the non-destructive nature is transparent. The API endpoint mapping adds clarity.

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 concise with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the main action, followed by Persian purpose, requirements, behavior, API mapping, and parameter explanations. Well-structured and efficient.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, 1 required, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, non-destructive nature, and parameter meanings. It does not discuss error handling or output format, but the presence of output schema reduces the burden. Mostly complete.

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 the description must compensate. It explains currency_id as 'numeric id of the currency' and instance as 'configured instance to use (default when omitted)'. This adds meaning beyond the schema's type definitions. Could be enriched with constraints or examples, but adequate.

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 uses a specific verb 'refresh' and resource 'deposits for one currency'. It explicitly states 'no money moved', distinguishing it from deposit-related mutation tools. The Persian purpose adds context. Among siblings like 'get_deposits' and 'get_currency_deposits', this tool's unique action is clear.

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 indicates it requires configured credentials and that it re-scans for incoming deposits. It implies use when needing to manually trigger a deposit scan, but does not explicitly contrast with reading deposits via get tools. No when-not or alternatives stated, but context is clear enough.

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