get_signatures_for_address

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'recent' without detailing the ordering, default limit, return format, or whether it returns only confirmed transactions. This is insufficient transparency for a tool that returns a list of signatures.

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, focused sentence with no superfluous words. It front-loads the core function and is appropriately sized for a simple read operation.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description should explain the expected response, the meaning of 'recent' (e.g., time range, confirmation status), and how parameters like 'limit' affect results. It does none of this, leaving the description incomplete for effective tool invocation.

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 description only mentions 'address' without adding semantic meaning beyond the parameter name. The 'limit' parameter is completely ignored, leaving the agent to guess its purpose and behavior. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 clearly states the function: 'Get recent transaction signatures involving an address.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the scope ('involving an address') distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_transaction or get_sol_balance.

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 implies usage for listing recent signatures for a given address, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. The purpose is clear, but no direct comparative guidance is provided.

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