get_recent_transactions

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It discloses the limit parameter's default and maximum, and the required address format, but lacks behavioral details such as ordering, pagination, error handling, or whether it is a read-only operation (implied by 'Get').

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 extremely concise, with four lines total. The purpose is stated first, followed by parameter details in a clean format. No extra words, every sentence earns its place.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown), the description does not need to detail return values. It specifies the blockchain (Base) and provides necessary parameter info. However, it could mention the order of transactions or any constraints like base mainnet only, but for a simple retrieval tool it is largely complete.

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%, but the description compensates by clearly explaining both parameters: address is a 0x-prefixed string, and limit is an integer with default 10 and max 50. This adds valuable context beyond the raw schema.

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 explicitly states that the tool gets recent transactions for a given address on Base. The verb 'Get' and resource 'recent transactions' are clear, and it distinguishes from siblings which cover activities like checking contracts, approvals, and balance.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_wallet_activity. The description simply states what it does without providing usage context or exclusions.

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