get_transaction

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that, such as network default, error conditions, or what fields are returned. It neither contradicts the annotations nor enriches them.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence. Every word is necessary for the basic purpose, with no padding or redundancy.

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 is too sparse for a tool with no output schema and many closely related siblings. It does not explain what 'transaction details' includes, nor does it differentiate from get_transaction_info or get_transaction_by_id. The optional network parameter is only in the schema, not synthesized into the description.

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 includes descriptions for both txHash ('Transaction hash') and network ('Network name. Defaults to mainnet.'), covering all parameters. The description's phrase 'by transaction hash' aligns with the schema but adds no additional semantic nuance, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource ('transaction details') with the lookup key ('by transaction hash'). However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like get_transaction_info or get_transaction_by_id, which appear to serve similar purposes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_transaction_info or get_transaction_by_id. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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