t2000_deposit_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the tool returns deposit instructions, which implies a read-only operation. However, it does not disclose any additional behavioral traits like authentication requirements or rate limits. For a simple informational tool, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 consists of two concise sentences. The first sentence immediately states the tool's function, and the second provides usage context. There is no extraneous information.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return values explicitly (wallet address, networks, assets). The tool is simple with no parameters, and the context from siblings indicates it is an informational tool. The description covers all needed information.

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?

There are zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (none needed). The description adds value by listing what the output contains (wallet address, supported networks, accepted assets), which compensates for the absence of an output schema.

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 explicitly states 'Get deposit instructions — wallet address, supported networks, accepted assets.' It clearly identifies the resource (deposit instructions) and the specific verb (get), distinguishing it from siblings like t2000_receive or t2000_withdraw which are actions.

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 says 'Use when the user asks how to fund or top up their account.' This provides clear context for when to invoke the tool. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it, but the positive guidance is sufficient.

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