toast_list_cash_deposits

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explain filter behavior, date handling, pagination, authentication requirements, or what records are included.

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 and has no wasted words. However, it is so terse that it provides no structural breakdown or additional context, which is a meaningful gap for a tool with four undocumented optional parameters.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and zero parameter documentation, the description is not complete enough for the agent to call the tool confidently. It identifies the resource but leaves filtering semantics, return shape, and scope entirely unspecified.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the four parameters have empty descriptions. The tool description mentions none of these parameters, so it does nothing to clarify the meaning or expected format of endDate, startDate, businessDate, or restaurantGuid.

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 states a specific verb and resource: list cash deposit records. This is clear and immediately tells the agent what the tool does. However, it does not differentiate from related sibling tools such as toast_list_cash_drawers or toast_list_cash_entries.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only restates the core action and does not mention contexts, exclusions, or sibling tools that might be more appropriate.

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