get_transaction

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

The description fully discloses behavior beyond annotations: automatic composite ID stripping, fallback to scheduled transaction template with marker shape for deleted matched transactions, and strict 404 for non-composite IDs. This adds significant value on top of the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations.

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 well-structured and concise, with no unnecessary words. Main action is front-loaded, and each sentence adds essential detail. It earns its length.

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 no output schema, the description covers the full range of behaviors: normal retrieval, composite ID handling, fallback shapes, and error behavior. It is complete and actionable for an agent.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds crucial meaning beyond schema by explaining how transactionId can be a composite ID and the resulting lookup behavior. This enriches the agent's understanding of parameter usage.

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 'Get a single transaction by ID' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by detailing unique composite ID handling and fallback behavior, which is not present in any sibling tool.

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 clear context for when to use this tool (for a single transaction by ID) and explains composite ID behavior. However, it does not explicitly address when not to use it or compare to sibling tools like get_transactions or search functions.

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