explorer_get_internal_txs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds that internal txs include contract-to-contract calls, which is useful context. However, it doesn't disclose potential limitations like block range filtering, pagination behavior, or what types of traces are included/excluded beyond the one example.

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, well-structured sentence. It front-loads the primary purpose and includes a clarifying detail without any wasted words.

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?

The description adequately conveys what the tool does but omits information about the return format or pagination. Since there is no output schema, the description should provide more context about what the results look like. It is sufficient for a simple read operation but lacks completeness for a 6-parameter tool.

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?

All parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage), so the description doesn't add semantic value beyond what the schema provides. The description's mention of 'for an address' aligns with the 'address' parameter but doesn't explain the other parameters or their defaults.

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 tool gets internal (trace) transactions for an address, with a specific verb and resource. The added detail 'including contract-to-contract calls' differentiates it from other explorer transaction tools like explorer_get_tx_history or explorer_get_token_transfers.

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. It doesn't mention comparison to sibling tools, prerequisites, or scenarios where another tool would be more appropriate. The context is implied but not explicit.

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