sui_get_function

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns signature details but does not mention whether it is read-only, idempotent, or requires authentication. For a query tool, this is a notable lack of transparency about safety and cost.

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 that efficiently conveys the tool's output and a key use case. It contains no filler or redundant information, earning its place.

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?

With four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is sparse. It does not cover the return format, error handling, or prerequisites. For a tool used in a workflow (before simulation), more completeness is needed to handle edge cases or validation.

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 75% of parameters without descriptions (only 'network' has one). The description does not explain 'package_id,' 'module_name,' or 'function_name,' relying on domain knowledge. With low schema coverage, the description should compensate but fails to add meaning beyond the tool's purpose.

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 the signature of a Move function, listing specific details (type parameters, argument types, return types, visibility). It distinguishes from siblings like sui_get_package by focusing on function signatures, and provides a concrete use case (before sui_simulate_transaction or PTB construction).

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 explicitly says 'Use this before calling sui_simulate_transaction or constructing a PTB,' which guides the agent on when to invoke it. It does not include negative examples or alternative tools, but the usage context is clear and sufficient given the sibling list.

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