midnight_get_transaction

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It states 'query' and lists return values, implying read-only, but does not explicitly confirm no side effects or discuss auth/rate limits. The return value list adds some transparency.

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 short, front-loaded with purpose, uses bullet lists for returns and use cases, and contains no redundant information.

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 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, returns, and uses. However, it does not mention that network is optional (required=0) or provide error handling context. Adequate but not complete.

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 coverage is 50% (only hash has a description). The tool description does not add any explanation for the 'network' parameter beyond its enum. The use-case list implies hash is needed but does not clarify required vs optional.

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 it queries transaction details from the Midnight blockchain, listing return fields and specific use cases. It distinguishes from sibling tools like midnight_get_block and midnight_get_balance by focusing on transactions.

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?

Explicitly lists use cases: check status, debug failures, inspect interactions. No when-not-to-use or alternatives are provided, but the context is clear.

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