address_get

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

No annotations provided, so the description must handle transparency. It indicates a read operation with no destructive behavior, but lacks details on latency, pagination, or authentication requirements. For a simple get, this is adequate but not exhaustive.

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, no redundant words. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Covers purpose and output scope (transaction history, UTXO details), but for a tool with no output schema, more detail on return structure or limits would improve completeness. Given low complexity, it's minimally adequate.

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 0% and the description does not add any meaning to the 'address' parameter beyond its type. No mention of expected format (e.g., bech32) or validation rules, offering no extra value.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Get', the resource 'specific Bitcoin address', and what is included ('transaction history and UTXO details'). This distinguishes it from siblings like address_balance_get which only returns balance.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this when you need comprehensive data about an address', providing clear context. Does not specify when not to use, but the sibling list implies alternatives for narrower queries.

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