get_transaction

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states it 'gets' information (implying read-only), but doesn't address permissions, error handling, rate limits, or response format. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its operational behavior.

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 that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient for a tool that retrieves 'detailed information'. It doesn't explain what details are returned, error conditions, or dependencies, leaving the agent with incomplete context for effective 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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters ('budget_id' and 'transaction_id') adequately. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific details beyond implying these IDs are needed, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific transaction'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'list_transactions' or 'get_account', which would require a 5.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a transaction ID), contrast with 'list_transactions' for multiple transactions, or specify use cases for detailed versus summary views.

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