koios_tx_cbor

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It states the output type ('raw CBOR-encoded transactions') but omits details about response structure (e.g., keyed by hash), error handling for missing hashes, pagination behavior, or any side effects. This is minimal disclosure for a tool with no annotation support.

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, direct sentence: 'Get raw CBOR-encoded transactions by their hashes'. It is front-loaded, specific, and contains no extraneous information.

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 simple retrieval tool, the description conveys the core purpose but does not explain the response format (e.g., how CBOR is returned or keyed) or how the pagination parameters (limit, offset) affect results. Given the absence of an output schema, this is a notable gap.

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?

The schema already describes all 5 parameters, including the required `_tx_hashes`. The description only reinforces that hashes are transaction hashes, adding little beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, a 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 states the tool's function with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('raw CBOR-encoded transactions') filtered by hashes. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like koios_tx_info and koios_tx_metadata, which provide decoded or metadata information.

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 phrase 'by their hashes' implies the tool is used when transaction hashes are available and raw CBOR is needed. However, there is no explicit comparison to alternatives or guidance on when not to use this tool, leaving the context solely implied.

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