cosmos_get_transaction

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get transaction details by hash', which implies a read-only operation but doesn't explicitly state it's non-mutating, what happens if the hash isn't found, or any other behavioral traits. This is minimal transparency.

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, concise sentence with no redundant information. Every word earns its place, and it front-loads the core purpose clearly.

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 tool's simplicity, the description is adequate but not complete: it doesn't describe the return format or provide any context about what 'transaction details' includes. With no output schema and no annotations, a bit more detail would improve completeness, but it's acceptable for such a straightforward read operation.

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 baseline is 3. The description doesn't add anything beyond the schema; 'by hash' simply reiterates the required parameter's description. The chain parameter's default and semantics are already fully documented in the 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'transaction details by hash', making it obvious what the tool does. It is distinct within the Cosmos family of tools (e.g., cosmos_get_balance, cosmos_get_delegations), though it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from similar transaction-fetching tools on other chains.

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, exclusions, or prerequisites. There is no mention of chain-specific behavior or when other tools might be more appropriate, leaving the agent without context.

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