agirails_list_transactions

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only and idempotent. The description adds filter options but does not disclose behavior beyond that, such as pagination, rate limits, or authentication needs. The mention of 'TypeScript snippet' introduces ambiguity rather than clarity.

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?

A single sentence, no wasted words. However, it could be restructured to more clearly separate the action from the filter details, and the 'TypeScript snippet' phrase is an odd inclusion that reduces clarity.

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 four optional parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description fails to explain the output format, pagination, or the role of the 'network' parameter. The cryptic 'TypeScript snippet' remark adds confusion. Significant gaps remain.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description must compensate. It explains the 'state' and 'role' parameters and their enum values but ignores 'limit' and 'network'. This partial coverage limits the description's value in helping agents set parameters correctly.

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 lists transactions with optional filters, specifying valid state and role values. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool agirails_get_transaction, and the phrase 'Returns a TypeScript snippet' is ambiguous about the actual output format.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like agirails_get_transaction or other list tools. The description omits any context about use cases or when not to use this tool.

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