koios_tx_metalabels

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states that it lists labels. It does not mention pagination behavior (despite limit/offset parameters in the schema), return format, or whether 'all' implies a single response or paginated results. This is a minimal but incomplete disclosure.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise for a simple list operation, though it lacks supplementary context that could make it more helpful. Not verbose, but not expansive either.

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 list endpoint with no output schema, the description should provide more context about what the labels represent, how they relate to transaction metadata, or pagination default behavior. It does not explain the return structure or usage scenario, leaving gaps in completeness for an agent that may be unfamiliar with the domain.

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 parameters (limit, order, offset, select) are fully described in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline for full coverage. No special parameter hints are provided, but none are needed.

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 'Get a list of all transaction metadata labels' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the action and scope. It is distinct from sibling tools like 'koios_tx_metadata' (which gets metadata for specific transactions) and 'koios_tx_by_metalabel' (which finds transactions by label), but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from these alternatives.

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, nor does it mention any exclusions or specific use cases. There is no context about querying labels vs metadata or label-based transaction search, leaving the agent without comparative usage advice.

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