get_dispenser

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the lookup key, such as return format or error handling. It does not contradict annotations, but it also does not enrich them significantly.

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, focused sentence with no extraneous content. It perfectly balances brevity with the essential information needed to identify the tool's function.

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 single-parameter getter with strong annotations, the description is largely complete. It clearly identifies the resource and lookup key. While it doesn't explicitly state that the return value is the dispenser object, this is implied by 'Get details' and is not a critical gap given the tool's simplicity.

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 schema covers the single parameter 'hash' with a description ('Dispenser transaction hash'), and the tool description repeats this information ('by its transaction hash'). With 100% schema coverage, the description adds no extra semantic value beyond what the schema already provides.

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 tool gets details of a specific dispenser by transaction hash. It specifies the verb ('Get'), the resource ('details of a specific dispenser'), and the key ('by its transaction hash'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_dispensers or get_dispensers_by_asset.

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 when to use it: when you have a transaction hash and need a single dispenser's details. However, it does not explicitly state alternatives or exclusion scenarios (e.g., 'use get_dispensers to list all'), leaving the guidance implicit rather than overt.

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