get_governance_deposit

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states a read operation but does not disclose behavior like what happens if the deposit is not found, if the response is always the same shape, or any potential side effects.

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 with no superfluous words. It could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, but it is efficiently short.

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 has two required parameters and no schema descriptions, the description is insufficient. It does not explain how to identify the deposit or what the output contains, though an output schema exists. The description does not leverage the context signal of zero coverage to compensate.

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?

The parameter names (proposal_id, depositor) are informative, but with 0% schema description coverage, the description should add context. It does not mention that both are required to uniquely identify a deposit, leaving agents to infer from the schema alone.

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 'Get specific deposit for a proposal' uses a clear verb-resource combination and implies a single deposit, which helps differentiate from listing. However, it does not explicitly state that it retrieves a unique deposit by proposal_id and depositor.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_governance_deposits or get_governance_proposal. The description lacks any when-to-use or when-not-to-use information.

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