koios_credential_txs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the output is transaction hashes rather than full transactions, indicating a read-only operation via 'Get'. However, it doesn't mention pagination behavior, ordering defaults, or error handling, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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, short, front-loaded sentence: 'Get transaction hashes for given payment credentials.' Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

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?

This is a low-complexity tool; the description and schema together cover the essential input (payment credentials array with pagination parameters) and output (transaction hashes). However, it lacks explicit mention of return format or default behavior, and there is no output schema to fill the gap, so a small deduction applies.

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%, with all six parameters described in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 specifies the verb ('Get'), the resource ('transaction hashes'), and the input scope ('for given payment credentials'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like koios_credential_utxos (which returns UTXOs) and koios_address_txs (which uses addresses instead of credentials).

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 vs alternatives such as koios_address_txs or koios_credential_utxos. The usage is implied by the description's focus on payment credentials, but there is no clear context or exclusion criteria.

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