get_agent_id_from_tx

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the basic function but does not disclose error behavior (e.g., invalid tx_hash), prerequisites (must be a registration tx), or whether any side effects exist. The minimal disclosure leaves significant 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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. It efficiently conveys the action and context.

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, the description does not clarify what the return value looks like (e.g., string format, error cases). For a simple retrieval tool, it is somewhat incomplete but still usable for basic understanding.

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 sole parameter tx_hash is described only by its name in the schema (0% coverage). The tool description adds the context 'registration transaction hash', providing some meaning beyond the schema, but does not specify format or constraints (e.g., hex length).

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'agent ID', and the source 'registration transaction hash'. It also adds context as a 'recovery tool', distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_agent_metadata or lookup_agent that use agent identifiers.

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 implies usage for recovering agent ID from a registration tx, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like lookup_agent or is_agent_registered. No when-not or alternative tools are mentioned.

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