get_coin_deposit_address

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful detail that multiple networks and addresses may be returned, but says nothing about authentication requirements or how the network list is selected per coin. Reasonable but not rich.

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?

One front-loaded sentence stating purpose, followed by a short Args block. Nothing is wasted; the Args repetition of the parameter is slightly redundant but clarifies the ticker format.

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 an output schema present, return values need not be described, and the read-only/open-world annotations cover behavior. For a single-parameter lookup tool, the description supplies the purpose and the parameter format, leaving only minor gaps such as auth context.

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% and the single parameter is undocumented in the schema, so the description carries the burden. It does so adequately: 'cointype: Coin ticker such as BTC' names the expected format and gives a concrete example, which is meaningfully more than the schema offers.

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 deposit networks and addresses for a coin.' It is clearly distinguishable from price/order/balance siblings, which cover different resources. It stops short of noting it is per-coin scoping vs. account-wide deposit history (get_my_deposits), so it is clear but not maximally differentiated.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool, no prerequisites, and no mention of related siblings like get_my_deposits or get_my_balances. The agent must infer that this retrieves the address to send funds to rather than a deposit history.

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