get_receipt

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

The description mentions the receipt includes status and logs, adding some behavioral context. However, without annotations, it does not disclose potential read-only nature, required permissions, or failure scenarios, leaving gaps.

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, concise sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

For a simple retrieval tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but does not fully cover what the receipt contains or any edge cases, leaving some ambiguity.

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 parameter 'hash' has no description in the schema (0% coverage), and the description does not clarify its format or purpose beyond what the schema provides (string). This leaves the agent with no additional semantic information.

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 retrieves a transaction receipt including status and logs, distinguishing it from 'get_transaction' which likely returns transaction details. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other sibling tools.

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 over alternatives such as 'get_transaction' or 'get_logs'. The agent must infer usage context from the tool name and sibling tools.

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