Explain Transaction

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It indicates the tool produces an explanation and event list, which implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly state that no data is modified, nor does it mention potential errors or limitations. Still, the 'Get' framing is honestly informational.

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 with no filler or redundant wording. It front-loads the action ('Get') and the output content, making it immediately scannable.

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?

With no output schema, the description appropriately names the return value: 'human-readable explanation and structured event list'. For a one-parameter tool this is largely sufficient, though it could be slightly more specific about the structure of the event list or error behavior.

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 for the single parameter txhash is 100%, and its description ('Transaction hash to explain') is clear. The tool description adds no extra parameter semantics, but none are needed because the schema already documents the parameter fully.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and clearly identifies the resource ('human-readable explanation and structured event list for a transaction'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_transactions or find_transactions, whose scope is listing or searching rather than explaining.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_transactions or get_portfolio_overview. It does not state prerequisites, such as needing a specific txhash, or suggest pairing it with other tools.

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