address_rune_deltas_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions pagination and implies filtering via start/end height but does not explain response format, permissions, side effects, or rate limits. This is insufficient for a read tool with no output schema.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, followed by usage context. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

With 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It omits details on pagination mechanics, delta structure, parameter ranges, and prerequisites. For a tool of this complexity, more context is necessary for correct invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate. It only references 'address' and 'pagination' but does not explain cursor, page_size, start_height, or end_height semantics. Parameter names provide hints but lack details on defaults, ranges, or behavior.

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 retrieves rune deltas for a specific Bitcoin address with pagination, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like address_balance_get and address_deltas_get by focusing on rune token changes.

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 includes 'Use this to analyze the history of rune token transfers for an address,' providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or name alternatives, which would be helpful given the many sibling tools.

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