spraay_classify_tx

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, but the description adds crucial cost information ($0.008 USDC) and states it's AI-powered. It does not contradict 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and key actions, no wasted words. Includes returns and cost in second sentence.

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 output schema exists and parameter count is 1, the description covers purpose, returns, and cost adequately. It is complete for a classification tool.

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 coverage is 100% with a single parameter 'hash' described in the schema. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond stating 'transaction hash to classify'.

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 it classifies transactions with risk scoring, specifying it handles Base transactions. It distinguishes from siblings like spraay_classify_address and spraay_contract_read by focusing on transaction hashes and decoded parameters.

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 implies usage when transaction classification and risk scoring are needed, but does not explicitly state when to use or avoid this tool versus alternatives like spraay_classify_address or spraay_contract_read.

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