trace_coin_lineage

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the function, not any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, required permissions, rate limits, or output format. This is insufficient for a tool that likely involves complex blockchain data retrieval.

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 sentence with no wasted words, effectively conveying 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?

Despite having a clear purpose and well-documented parameters, the description lacks crucial context about the tool's output and behavior. For a tracing tool with no output schema, more details on the structure of the lineage or any limitations are needed to be 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?

The input schema already describes all three parameters with 100% coverage. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., the format of txid, the meaning of output_index in the context of a transaction, or how depth affects the trace). 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 specific purpose: tracing the lineage of coins from a transaction output. It uses a specific verb ('trace') and resource ('lineage of coins') and distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on fees, mempool, UTXO distribution, etc.

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 does not mention prerequisites, typical use cases, or when not to use it. The sibling tools exist but are not referenced in the description.

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