decode_tx

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

With no annotations, description provides some behavioral info: 'Mined txs cached in-process' and pricing ($0.001). However, it does not disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, or error conditions, leaving gaps.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action. No redundant information. However, could be slightly more structured by separating output details from pricing.

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 simple schema and no output schema, the description covers inputs, outputs (per chain), use cases, caching, and pricing. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to decide and invoke correctly.

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 50% (only tx_hash described). The tool description reiterates that chain is from the given enum list and tx_hash is the hash, adding minimal value beyond schema. It does not explain what the returned fields mean in detail.

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?

Clearly states it decodes a mainnet transaction by hash, specifying the input requirements (chain and hash) and output fields per chain. Differentiates from sibling tools like decode_calldata which only decode calldata, not full 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?

Provides examples of use cases (tx inspection, audit, agent UX) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. Lacks guidance on when to prefer this over decode_calldata for calldata-only needs.

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