okx_get_fiat_deposit_methods

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It includes '[L:READ]' hinting at read-only nature, but lacks details on side effects, permissions, rate limits, or data freshness. The agent has little to infer about the tool's behavior beyond it being a read operation.

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 extremely short, but at the cost of clarity. It front-loads code labels and Chinese text. While concise, it sacrifices comprehensibility for an English-speaking AI agent. A better structure would be a plain English sentence stating the tool's function.

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 (no parameters, no output schema), the description should at least state what it returns (e.g., 'Lists available fiat deposit methods'). It only provides a prerequisite and a category label, leaving the agent to guess the output. This is incomplete for an effective tool definition.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so there is nothing to document. The description does not need to add parameter semantics. The baseline score of 4 applies because the schema coverage is trivially 100% and no additional explanation is necessary.

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 cryptic labels like '[L:READ]' and Chinese text, and the name 'okx_get_fiat_deposit_methods' suggests listing deposit methods, but the description does not explicitly state that. It fails to clearly communicate the tool's core purpose to an AI agent.

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 includes a prerequisite instruction '→ 请先调用 agent_catalog', which is useful guidance. However, it does not specify when to use this tool over sibling tools like okx_get_fiat_deposit or okx_get_fiat_deposit_orders, nor does it explain when not to use it.

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