get_validator_slashes

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral details such as pagination, sorting, or any side effects. It only states the basic function. The tool likely returns a list with pagination (given page/limit params), but that is not mentioned.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it is under-specified for a tool with 5 parameters and pagination. It could front-load more information without becoming overly long. The structure is minimal.

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 the tool has 5 parameters and likely returns a paginated list of slashing events, the description is too brief. It does not cover parameter semantics, pagination, or output format, though an output schema exists. The brevity leaves significant gaps for effective tool use.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any parameters. The schema has 5 parameters (validator_address, starting_height, ending_height, page, limit) with defaults and types, but the description adds no meaning. For example, it doesn't clarify that starting_height and ending_height are optional filters or how pagination works.

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 the tool retrieves slashing events for a validator. The verb 'Get' and resource 'slashing events' are specific, and the scope 'for a validator' is clear. Among sibling tools, this stands out as validator-specific, though it doesn't differentiate from other validator-related tools like get_validator_commission.

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. Does not indicate prerequisites, when not to use, or mention other tools like list_validator_slashes if they exist. The description provides no usage context.

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