nft_get_transfer_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions an external dependency (VeChainStats) but omits important behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, return format, potential rate limits, or whether the history is restricted to a specific network. The verb 'get' implies a read-only operation, but richer context is missing.

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 that front-loads the primary action and scope. Every word contributes value, and there is no unnecessary detail or repetition.

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 annotations, the description should explain more about return values, pagination, or usage constraints. It does not mention what the transfer history contains, how pages work, or how this tool relates to sibling tools. This is a minimal description that leaves out key context.

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 description coverage is 100% since both parameters ('address' and 'page') have descriptive text. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource: 'Get NFT transfer history for an address'. It is specific and action-oriented. However, it does not differentiate from the closely named sibling tool 'vechainstats_get_nft_transfers', which likely serves a similar or overlapping purpose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as vechainstats_get_nft_transfers or nft_get_owned_tokens. The note 'uses VeChainStats' hints at an external dependency but does not clarify the intended use case or how it differs from similar tools.

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