stellar_soroban_get_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Fetch historical events,' which implies a read operation, but it does not disclose return format, pagination behavior, ordering, or whether filters can be combined. The lack of an output schema makes this gap more significant.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. However, it is so terse that it mostly restates the tool name and does not enrich the definition with behavioral or usage context that would make it more helpful.

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 four parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, a one-sentence description is not complete. It omits what the returned events look like, how pagination works, what the startLedger parameter implies for result ranges, and when to prefer this tool over other data-fetching siblings.

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 100%, so all four parameters are already documented with descriptions. The tool description adds no parameter-level nuance beyond the general notion of events emitted by a Soroban smart contract, so it neither helps nor hurts beyond the schema baseline.

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 ('Fetch') and a specific resource ('historical events emitted by a Soroban smart contract'), making the tool's core purpose immediately clear. This resource is distinct from the sibling tools that handle account history, transaction meta, ledger meta, or Soroban state/simulation operations.

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 stellar_soroban_read_state, stellar_get_ledger_meta, or stellar_get_transaction_meta. It also does not mention that startLedger is required or how this tool relates to other Soroban tools, so the agent must infer usage from the schema and tool name.

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