Get scheduled transaction

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered, but the description adds nothing beyond that — no note on not-found behavior, no indication the record is a template rather than a posted transaction. For a read with rich annotations the bar is lower, yet zero added context is still weak.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler, so it is concise. However, the brevity reflects under-specification rather than tightness — nothing beyond the bare minimum is stated.

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?

The tool is simple: one required ID, full schema coverage, and an output schema so return values need not be described. Given that, the description is minimally sufficient, though it omits any guidance on where the ID comes from or how it differs from get_transaction.

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 a single parameter at 100% schema description coverage (uuid format, required, described as the transaction to get), the schema carries parameter meaning fully. The description adds no syntax or sourcing detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

"Get one scheduled transaction" essentially restates the tool name and title without adding scope or disambiguation. It does identify verb and resource, but an agent gets no help distinguishing it from get_transaction or list_scheduled_transactions.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of the sibling list_scheduled_transactions for fetching many, and no note on whether the ID must come from that listing first. The agent must infer all routing from the name alone.

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