transactions_for_block

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully inform about behavior. It mentions that log events are included by default and can be excluded via noLogs, but it omits details about pagination, rate limits, or the exact return format. The page parameter is required but not mentioned, which is a behavioral gap.

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 short at two sentences, which is efficient, but the omission of the page parameter and lack of structure (no bullet points or section separation) reduce clarity. It could be more complete without extra length.

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 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and some options but fails to mention the required page parameter or clarify the output structure. For a tool that fetches all transactions from a block, additional context like pagination behavior and output fields would be beneficial.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. However, the description incorrectly states that only chainName and blockHeight are required, while the schema also requires 'page'. This omission misleads about parameter semantics and reduces the value beyond the 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 'fetch' and resource 'transactions including decoded log events in a block', and gives a specific use case (flag interesting wallets or transactions). It distinguishes from siblings like transaction (single tx) or transactions_for_address (by address) by focusing on block-level retrieval.

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 a common use case and lists required and optional parameters, implying when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives among siblings, which would strengthen guidance.

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