stellar_soroban_get_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Fetch' implying read-only, but does not explicitly confirm lack of side effects, rate limits, or ordering. The description is too minimal to inform an agent about behavioral traits.

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 sentence, which is concise but sacrifices information. For a tool with 4 parameters and filtering capabilities, a bit more structural detail (e.g., listing key features) would improve usability without losing conciseness.

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 the complexity of Soroban events (filtering, pagination, return format), the description is incomplete. It does not explain what events are, how filtering works, or the structure of the response. An agent lacks crucial context to interpret results or handle errors.

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 has 100% description coverage for all 4 parameters, providing clear meanings for startLedger, contractIds, topics, and limit. The tool description adds no extra semantic value beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate when schema covers parameters well.

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 verb 'Fetch' and specifies the resource 'historical events emitted by a Soroban smart contract'. It clearly indicates the tool's function. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings, though no sibling directly competes (only other Soroban tools like invoke/read state). A score of 4 is appropriate for being clear but lacking explicit distinction.

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. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions. With 27 sibling tools, such guidance is absent, making it hard for an agent to decide when to invoke this tool.

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