get_sui_transaction

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but only states what the tool does, not how it behaves. It doesn't mention whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are needed, rate limits, error conditions, or what format the transaction details will be returned in. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this is insufficient behavioral context.

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, efficient sentence that communicates the core functionality without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a straightforward lookup tool and front-loads the essential information.

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 tool with 3 parameters (including a complex nested options object), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'transaction details' includes, how the options affect the output, or what format the response will take. The agent would struggle to use this tool effectively without additional 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?

The description mentions 'by digest' which corresponds to the required txDigest parameter, but doesn't explain the optional 'options' object or 'network' parameter. With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly, so the description adds minimal value beyond what's in the structured schema.

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 ('Get') and resource ('Sui transaction details') with the specific mechanism ('by digest'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'get_transaction' or 'get_sui_object', which could cause confusion about when to use this specific Sui transaction tool versus other transaction-related tools.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools including general 'get_transaction' and other Sui-specific tools like 'get_sui_object' and 'query_sui_transactions', the agent receives no help in selecting this specific tool for Sui transaction details by digest over other options.

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