get_tx

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 only says 'Decode a transaction' and lists outputs, but omits whether the operation is read-only, any destructive effects, authorization needs, or rate limits. 'Starter tier' hints at limitations but is too vague to be actionable.

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?

Two sentences, short and to the point. However, the final 'Starter tier' is unclear and may mislead without context. It could be removed or explained. Overall, it is not verbose but sacrifices clarity for brevity.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return format (e.g., is it raw JSON, decoded fields?), error handling (invalid hash, unsupported chain), and any constraints. An agent needs more to invoke correctly, especially given the variety of sibling tools.

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 coverage is 50%: only 'hash' gets a description ('Transaction hash.'). 'chain' lacks description. The tool description adds no parameter-level detail; it only lists output fields. Since coverage is low, the description should compensate but does not clarify the 'chain' parameter's purpose or accepted values.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Decode' and resource 'transaction', listing key outputs like sender, receiver, value, events, status. This distinguishes it from sibling tools, which focus on other data types (prices, news, entities, etc.). The 'Starter tier' phrase is ambiguous but does not obscure the core 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, no context about inputs like transaction hash format or supported chains. The description does not mention any restrictions or use cases, leaving the agent without decision-making support.

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