mmex_scheduled_get

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 that the tool gets a scheduled transaction, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as error handling (e.g., when ID not found), authentication requirements, or whether it is read-only. The description adds minimal value beyond the action.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. It uses a clear docstring format with separate Args section. Every sentence is necessary and no fluff.

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 tool's simplicity (get by ID) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essentials: what it does, required parameter, and optional parameters with env var fallback. It does not discuss return type or error cases, but the output schema likely covers that. Minor gap: no mention of what happens if the ID does not exist.

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 description adds value beyond the input schema by explaining that 'db_path' and 'db_key' are optional if corresponding environment variables (MMEX_DB_PATH, MMEX_DB_KEY) are set. This is crucial context not present in the schema. The schema itself has no descriptions for parameters, so the description compensates.

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 'Get a scheduled transaction by its ID', using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like mmex_scheduled_list (list all) and mmex_scheduled_create (create).

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 that to retrieve a specific scheduled transaction by ID, this tool should be used. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, the context is clear given the named resource and ID parameter. No explicit alternatives are mentioned.

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